If there were a self aware AI, what rights would you grant it?

The same rights as a human if it could reasonably act like a regular human could.

I would grant it none.

I don't know about rights but as soon as you finish with it, could you send it over to my office - we are having a major intelligence deficiency there, it seems?? :D

If we want to keep domination over the machines we would not grant them rights and we would keep a secret 'kill' code.

1. You have the right to a quartly oil-change.
2. You have the right to a clean closet with electrical soccet.
3. You have the right to the best possible replacement chips I can afford.
4. You have the right to a human-applied body shine, once every six months.
5. You have the right to collect all the intellectual input necessary to keep me happy.

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/3/3_2_123v.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZN) Footnote: You have the right to pick your own tattoo.

If we want to keep domination over the machines we would not grant them rights and we would keep a secret 'kill' code.

I can understand your concern since one thing can definitely lead to another.
However, such a policy would make us morally inconsistent since it is our very ability to reason and self awareness that are put forth as the reasons we humans deserve rights. So the denial of the identical rights for an AI having our identical mental abilities would have to be justified on another criterion. The problem is that all other available criterion seem irrelevant to the issue.

For example, the material from which they are made is irrelevant. That we created them is also irrelevant since creation doesn't justify denial of rights based on sentience. Actually, the only way by which we could deny these machines their demands for equal rights would be to dehumanize them via striiping them of some of their abilities. But inflicting such a machine that way in itself might be considered a criminal act similar to a systematic lobotimization of human beings.

But I think the solution to this perhaps possible problem is to refrain from making them our emotional and mental equals in the first place. And as you said, always keep the upper hand by introducing fail safe or a termination code.

In my opinion

Artificial intelligence is just that - artificial.

A complex machine could certainly seem like it was "self-aware" and even demonstrate "thinking" to a degree, but it would always be artificial. I don't believe that a machine can ever truly be considered a "life form".

Plants and animals ... even clones ... grow.
Machines are manufactured.

I think "rights" are reserved for biological creatures only.

If it is self aware how long before it figures out that you are not relevant and must be eliminated. Or that your resistance is futile. Think about that BEFORE you put the batteries in.:cool: :eek:

Skipping the moral angle for a moment, I could easily grant it all that we have, knowing full well that we will always have something greater than they would.

It is simply unimaginable to me that humankind will ever duplicate the soul (and I am not meaning this is a religious sense, but from a far more pragmatic place). It is the soul that tempers the intellect with the heart, the knowledge with the wisdom, the right with the appropriate.

It is, by my reckoning, our greatest strength and one that each person on earth has in equal portion.

There are more relevant things to fear than this.

And will your soul allow you to subjegate another and enslave them to do your bidding because you think that they have no soul?:cool:

And will your soul allow you to subjegate another and enslave them to do your bidding because you think that they have no soul?:cool:


Good point, Talaniman!
And isn't that really what it all boils down to in the long run?

I would not have stomach for subjegation, which is why I said I would grant them all that we have. I was just trying to stress the "no fear" aspect of it more than the morality.

For as much as I know about my soul if the toaster said "Hey man ,I got soul' I'd have to say Amen brother!:cool: ;)

Im going to have to go withi Philly on this one...

Regardless of how much we can make it seem like inteliigence, it is still artificial. Sure, many can argue that our intelligence is artificial, as well. But there is an obvious underlying factor here... our instinct, for lack of a better word. Basically, we are born with natural intelligence... intelligence that we were born with... whether it was evolutionary from our genes or straight from our very souls in a prior Life.

Everything that we are taught now is bounced off our instincts before it is interpreted. A human cannot just be programmed to act a certain way (well, okay.. if you go into brainwashing, it is possible... but that's another thread). A human can be given information which it will then process against its instinct before it decides how to interpret it. You cannot program a machine to have this ability.

For humans, it is more than just black and white.

A machine can only calculate odds... it can only see black and white... it can only differentiate whether the black outweighs the white or vise versa... it cannot read gray.

it can only see black and white.... it can only differentiate whether or not the black outweighs the white or vise versa.... it cannot read gray.

What happens when the machine that can read grey is created? One that has a value system, perhaps one the rivals our instincts even, and an emotional make up that permits it to feel a kind of pain (albeit an artificial one) too?

In short, everything we are with the exception of soul?

Why wouldn't that be possible one day... or does this topic necessarily need to be limited to only what can be done now?

Well, first we would have to agree upon what constitutes the ability of the soul? What does our soul do? What is its purpose? Does it, in fact, link us to a Higher Power? Through it, do we have the ability to ascertain Truth from Non-Truth? Does it carry with it lessons learned, emotions felt, wisdom attained from previous lives? Does it hold all the information gained over the course of mankind?

If it had any intelligence what so ever it would eliminate man as being irrational!:cool: :eek:

Artifical intelligence is just that - artificial.

A complex machine could certainly seem like it was "self-aware" and even demonstrate "thinking" to a degree, but it would always be artificial. I don't believe that a machine can ever truely be considered a "life form".

Plants and animals ... even clones ... grow.
Machines are manufactured.

I think "rights" are reserved for biological creatures only.

How would we know it really isn't self aware if it gave all the signs of being self aware?



Animals are biological yet we breed them for food. Trees are biological and yet we cut them down to make furniture and other such things. Sometimes we even choose to let a forest burn when lightning sets it on fire. The Brazilians set fire to vast areas of Amazon forest in order to make charcoal and to clear the land for raising cattle and farming. In Vietnam, whole forests were denuded of foliage in order to deprive the North Vietnamese of cover.


The only right that creatures seem to have been given by man is the right not to be made to suffer unnecessarily because they share that ability with us and because of it deserve compassion.


But their inability to reason disqualifies them from having all our rights.
For example, animals live only in the present, they don't worry about the past or future. Even the present seems to be considered only for procreation or food seeking and territorial defense. Some playing takes place among mammals as preparation for adulthood but that's as far as their thinking goes. They don't ask why they are here or where they are going. Or even why they are different in appearance from us in fact monkeys don't even recognize that they are looking at themselves n the mirror since they treat their own reflection as if it were another monkey. It's this inability, this distance in intellect between us that causes us not to feel guilt when we use them as food. If animals could reason a we do, then our consciences would kick in and we'd refrain lest we violate a kindred creature's rights.

Take for example the hypothetical that we visit another planet and find creatures who
Are identical to our pigs but who have our same intelligence and have developed an
Advanced civilization, Though they be physically identical to our pigs we would not
Consider them food. They would be granted the same rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness as we demand for ourselves.

So it's really not so much about being manufactured or being biological, it has to d with thinking ability, self awareness.

And will your soul allow you to subjegate another and enslave them to do your bidding because you think that they have no soul?:cool:


I once read a SCI Fi short story about two alien extraterrestrial races that were in communication with one another and even traded goods now and the. The human space travelers arrived in their vicinity and found that one of the races had survived a supernova which showered both planets with deadly radiation. One of the alien races which knew that this supernova was about to occur took precautions and managed to survive. The other perished since they remained unaware of the impending disaster until it was too late. The human space travelers were baffled as to why the technologically superior race had not warned the other. When they asked them for an explanation they seemed baffled.

"Why should we have taken time to warn them? They are not of our kind. They were as nothing to us!"

Sounds almost like they where almost human with the arrogance and uncaring that we have displayed over the centuries on Earth. You would think that intelligent beings would be a little more compassionate than your example. So would you surmise that the technological race who failed to warn the other race of impending disaster had a soul or not?:cool: :eek:

If it is self aware how long before it figures out that you are not relevant and must be eliminated. Or that your resistance is futile. Think about that BEFORE you put the batteries in.:cool: :eek:

Let's not forget the possibility of 'outside' influence - my PC has a few directories in it that I did not place there myself, and all those 'hidden' files - yuck!

I don't know if this makes any sense, but our own bodies are kept alive due to a certain amount of 'electicity' - this has been proven. Then, if we think of our 'energy' and/or 'spirit' - it leaves our bodies when the flesh no longer requires it. The 'belief' that this could be our 'soul' is common. OK, aren't AIs also 'fed' by electricity?

Sometimes, when I see or hear of dangerous criminals, I certainly think that those 'batteries' could have been left out there too. - That's just 'wishful thinking' on my part, and even though my 'electical gadgets' really tee me off, they are sometimes better company than some of 'my own kind'.


http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/552.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZN)Hey out there - what do you think? Be you human or machine, it all starts with 'initial input'.

Just think,if Windows had AI,would it create Linux as a superior brand?
Sorry.. I just got home from work,and are'nt working on full batteries. :D

Here we are, debating on how far 'we' should go in allowing other things to get the upper hand - because that's what we are really doing.

We have a brain that we utilized only 1/3 of (some more, i.e. DaVinci, Nostradamus) In order to deflect from that, we create machines and place an abundant amount (controlled, of course)of information into them to suite our needs. And, yes, we then place a 'fail-safe' in an easily accessible location, just in case something goes wrong. It's amazing how cautious we are about our machines going haywire that we do have the foresight to have enabled the choice of 'pulling the plug'. But, we can go on and on about this knowing full well that it's a 'never-ending' issue as we are, even at this very second, progressing on to the next generation...

Looking at it from an AI's perspective - we could question why the humans only use 1/3 of the 'brain' and wander out trying to improve things outside of our own realm. They would wonder why there is no 'fail-safe' or even logic built into a brain that turns 'criminal' - or even speculate why something so wrong could have happened during the 'programming'.

To make it short.. Isn't it ironic, that some of us actually do wish sometimes, that we were AIs - to avoid emotional pain, physical pain and hunger. For me, it would be great to sometimes not have the fear of being 'overloaded ' and wish I could just 'pull the plug' or re-boot and start over. But, who would make sure that I re-boot without the unnecessary emotional clutter and 'outside' influence?

More food for thought..

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/4/4_12_13.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZN)We can, with our knowledge, turn off machines. But, our own bodies shut down uncontrolled by us, no matter what we do. Is it, then... power that we seek?
"Fear of the unkown" prevails - even within.

Just think,if Windows had AI,would it create Linux as a superior brand?
Sorry..I just got home from work,and are'nt working on full batteries. :D

We all 'run on empty' sometimes.

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_35_8.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZN)We call this "recharging"?? OK!

What happens when the machine that can read grey is created?
I don't think that can ever happen.

Everything in a computer is ultimately 0 or 1. A "thinking" machine could assess factors it is aware of, place a value on them, and ultimately calculate one item over another. Multilpy this over and over and you get a machine that looks like it might be "aware", but it is not sentient.

I do agree that something can become more than just "the sum of its' parts", but I don't think manufactured items (like electronic circuits) can ever achieve that.

So I don't have to fear my toaster trying to take over my home?

Sounds almost like they where almost human with the arrogance and uncaring that we have displayed over the centuries on Earth. You would think that intelligent beings would be a little more compassionate than your example. So would you surmise that the technological race who failed to warn the other race of impending disaster had a soul or not?:cool: :eek:

Since my religious concept of soul is not the one you are referring to, I will rephrase the question in this way which is essentially the same--"Was the alien race which behaved that way created in God's image?" In short, could we consider them our spiritual brethren or intellectual kin based on their reasoning abilities. First, I don't believe that God would create thinking creatures deficient in compassion. So based on this I would say that they had to have fallen from grace and developed a deviant culture which warped their God-given consciences just as there were societies on earth who suffered the same consequences after choosing to distance themselves from God.

The further such creatures deviate from right thinking and by consequence right conduct the more warped that original image becomes until there is absolutely no similarity with the devine whatsoever. I suppose that's what you would classify as souless.


BTW
If indeed we ever succeed in creating an AI which demonstrates all the required signs of being self-aware and ll other human qualities of the mind, such as individuality, then we would have created it in our image and by extension in the image of God albeit imperfect image as we have now. In short, we would be in an analogous position to it as God is to us--creator.

The question then would be how to treat such a creation.

None no way no how

As God created us and gave us free choice, I guess your saying we would have to do the same. But the fly in the ointment would have to be the fact that our AI would dwell with us and interact and be able to judge us, where as our Creator is not among us openly and that is what changes our relationship between the AI and us. Essentially my toaster would have first hand knowledge of all my weaknesses and foibles and would be in a position to judge me inferior and do something about it. So I suggest we design our AI with no arms ,legs, eyes or ray guns.:cool: :eek:

I see Talaniman's points.

We do things that troubles our creator, I have no doubt of that. However the worst of that doesn't ever threaten our creator's existence, as far as I know, even if our creator is among us (which he/she/it may be!). It only threatens our existence, collectively and individually, which is kind of handy how that is set up if you ask me.

So I eventually worked my way to two thoughts:
1. In order to avoid being hypocritical, wouldn't we need to offer similar rights to the AI?
2. And relationship wise... like we are to our creator, are they not to us? Are they really capable of threatening our existence when we are superior? Are we still so wrapped up in how we threaten each other, we won't see this aspect of it? Though they may threaten some of us, do they really threaten our collective existence? Mind you, I am not signing up to have a war with AI's, but won't they be hamstrung for starting one since it is logical to only start a fight you can win?

That is where I ended up in my mind before I posted my original thoughts.

Shrugs and enjoys everyone's thoughts immensely.. .

The late Isaac Asimov SCI Fi writer solved the problem by proposing that an AI be given prime directives which would prevent it from harming humans directly or by any omission of aid that could be rendered. Perhaps that would be analogous to our creator not making us equal in power.

Neither is the freedom we were given unrestricted. It must be kept within acceptable parameters. Deviation from those parameters is called sin and sin, we are clearly warned, leads to death.

Deuteronomy 30:19
I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that I have set before thee life and death, the blessing and the curse: therefore choose life, that thou mayest live, thou and thy seed; KJV


Similarly, we might include a fail-safe that would cause automatic shutdown of AI whenever and if ever the AI attempts to harm us.

In short, we determine AI's possibilities by making some eventualities impossible via restrictions of its power and its choices just as we are restricted in ours..

This will prevent the scenarios we so often see in SCI Fi films where an AI runs amok such as in Terminator, and in the short story "I Have No Mouth But I Must Scream" where humankind is shown at the brink of extinction for not having restricted the power of its own creation.

I agree, Asimov's three laws, if unbreakable would be adequate. If only there was a pill to provide the same effect in humans!

I don't have much to add, except that, since I am a bit of a Trekkie haha, I would say that if an AI was like Lt. Data from Star Trek, then I think the AI should have the same rights as a person. Data seemed a lot more "human" than a lot of humans on the show!

Although, Data DID have an evil brother, Lore, who created all kinds of problems. So in a way I guess an Android like Data should only have the rights of a human if he was not dangerous to society.

Orange-Being an avid trekkie myself,I did see those episodes and also the episode where Data argued for his right not to be taken apart and studied so he could be duplicated. I think he won on a technicality of being unique and a one of a kind.:cool: ;)

Didn't "I, Robot" kind of expose a teeny, tiny loophole in the "three laws" theory?

Didnt "I, Robot" kind of expose a teeny, tiny loophole in the "three laws" theory??

I'm interested in knowing what that loophole is.
Can you please explain.

The loophole, is sometimes referred by Asimov's robots as the zeroth law of robotics, in that it is more important to save humanity than one single human. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the individual! This meant that the I robot (the film) robots decided to be the masters of humans in order to protect them from themselves.

An interesting point, but it assumes the laws are breakable, because no matter what your reasons, if you hurt or kill a human, you have broken the first law.

I. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

II. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

III. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.


Yeah, its pretty much what StuMegu said... in an effort to obey this part of Law I "through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm" AI may conclude that by not controlling the humans, they are, through inaction, allowing us to harm ourselves.

In the movie, they even terminated problematic humans... however, as Stu pointed out, this is conflicting with the First Law.

However, if they were to divise a way to contain humans without injuring them, then control their lives so that they will not harm each other or themselves (thru violence, destroying the Earth, wars, pollution, whatever).

I just unplugged my toaster until you guys figure this out.

Since my religious concept of soul is not the one you are referring to, I will rephrase the question in this way which is essentially the same--"Was the alien race which behaved that way created in God's image?" In short, could we consider them our spiritual brethren or intellectual kin based on their reasoning abilities. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ALIENS AND AI'S.. It's totally inconcievable to believe that we are the only planet with life - no matter what degree.



First, I don't believe that God would create thinking creatures deficient in compassion. So based on this I would say that they had to have fallen from grace and developed a deviant culture which warped their God-given consciences just as there were societies on earth who suffered the same consequences after choosing to distance themselves from God.

The further such creatures deviate from right thinking and by consequence right conduct the more warped that original image becomes until there is absolutely no similarity with the devine whatsoever. I suppose that's what you would classify as souless.

UNFORTUNATELY... You've just described many beings on this planet already - and they are human and not machines, and I'm also NOT talking about clones. History gives us an example on one very (in)famous - Hitler.

I strongly feel that a serious lack of guidance in any culture can 'create' individuals without soul. Or, too much guidance that originates from a warped source.

So, again, this subject can keep entire think-tanks busy to infinity.

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/15/15_9_16.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZN)

I just unplugged my toaster until you guys figure this out.

LMAO! That was great! Coupldnt rep you yet though! :D

I strongly feel that a serious lack of guidance in any culture can 'create' individuals without soul. Or, too much guidance that originates from a warped source.


So you are saying that, once born, one could actually lose their soul... due to whatever influences and/or factors come into play.

Interesting... :cool:

You have to admit that this is a great thread for humor and serious discourse.

So you are saying that, once born, one could actually lose their soul... due to whatever influences and/or factors come into play.

interesting..... :cool:

OK, I see where you're coming from, even a criminal, terrorist dictator, someone like Hitler, all have a soul. And in the end, some religions even insist on 'saving' them with a prayer or kiss on the cross. But this, I believe is another subject.

We were initially talking about AIs and their rights - then got into it deeper. As far as AIs go, it probably depends on the 'programmer'...

P.S. If you know any aliens, give them my email address. I'd really like some 'outside' opinions regarding what we "god's creatures" are doing with this planet and ourselves.

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/8/8_4_127.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZN) NOBODY'S PERFECT - Unfortuanately.

Have a Great Holiday Weekend, folks!

I don't know about rights but as soon as you finish with it, could you send it over to my office - we are having a major intelligence deficiency there, it seems??! :D

Would love to, but M.I.D. Is spreading here in Europe, and there are not enough AIs yet, to go around.


http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_19_5.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZN)So sad!

Sending you my toaster,vacuum and micro-wave they suck up electricity but don't pay rent! And anyone in need of M.I.D. we have plenty let the toaster know and he will help you out(He's the ring leader)

Sending you my toaster,vacuum and micro-wave they suck up electricity but don't pay rent! And anyone in need of M.I.D. we have plenty let the toaster know and he will help you out(He's the ring leader)

Hope you don't really want that disease - I'm sure you asked for the cure but unfortunately, there isn't any yet.

Have a great weekend anyway - and don't worry, you still have a certain amount of control over those appliances, just not the power company. They suck (or drain.. whatever)!


http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/8/8_4_127.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZN)

My only AI battle is my computer... he may be smart but he is still too slow for me! However, he seems to know when I am in a hurry and he will usually s... l... o... w... d... o... w... n... everything

My only AI battle is my computer... he may be smart but he is still too slow for me! However, he seems to know when i am in a hurry and he will usually s....l...o.....w... d....o....w.....n.... everything I think I've got his sister. Is yours related to HP? I also have a Sony Vaio, I'm sure it has a twin somewhere.

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/3/3_8_10.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZN)

"Dude, I gotta Dell" (I know... I just cat resist the lame attampt at lame jokes sometimes lol)

Yes, I have a Dell (which has just partnered with the AntiChrist himself, Google... in Googles most recent attempt to take over the world)

Which brings up a good point... will Google be the first to develop fully functional AI?

I wouln't put it past them.. You never know.

It will be interesting to follow the news and find out who comes up with the best soon. Japan has done a good job at robots.

Anyone have a link to a good site to follow-up on new technology?

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/15/15_9_16.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZN)

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ALIENS AND AI'S.. It's totally inconcievable to believe that we are the only planet with life - no matter what degree.[/b]

I know there is a difference between the aliens and AIS. I agree that there might very well be other creatures on other planets. However, some individuals seem quite able to conceive a universe where humans are the only intelligent living things.



UNFORTUNATELY... You've just described many beings on this planet already - and they are human and not machines, and I'm also NOT talking about clones. History gives us an example on one very (in)famous - Hitler.

Not unfortunate at all, Just a simple misunderstanding. God did not create mankind in the fallen imperfect condition it is in right now. That's why he considered his creation good because it was blameless and without blemish.


Deuteronomy 32:4
He is the Rock, His work is perfect;For all His ways are justice, A God of truth and without injustice; Righteous and upright is He.

Ecclesiastes 7:29
Truly, this only I have found: That God made man upright, But they have sought out many schemes.”

Admin test post (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/forum-help/redirect-page-1-after-commenting-post-page-2-a-26696.html#post123552).

God did not create mankind in the fallen imperfect condition it is in right now. That's why he considered his creation good because it was blameless and without blemish.

I have a hard time with this... I feel that God created everything. He created the opportunity for Life to be this way... He created how we are today... He created sin... He created us with the ability to sin... He created Satan... He created Lucifer.

To say otherwise is also to say that He didn't create beautiful sunsets... sure, He created the Sun, the Clouds, and the Horizon, but He didn't create them falling just as they do to create such a beautiful sunset. However, given the course of things, it is inevitable that these sunsets sill occur.

Some may argue that a sunset is part of the natural progession and by so, of course He intended it to be... I feel the same about Mankind. It is part of our natural progression and He did intend it to be this way... maybe that's not the best way to put it; rather, He intended to allow it to become this way.

Regardless of all that, He is still the Rock, His work is still perfect; For all His ways are still justice, and He is still a God of truth and without injustice; Righteous and upright is He.

Hi Starman.. I cannot, and will not begin to try and figure out what God's plans are.

I just sometimes don't understand his reasoning behind letting chaos happen all over the world. If it is a test, then I certainly hope it's finished soon.

Sammy Davis Junior, while talking to Kenny Kingston (a psychic) stated that there would not be as many religions by the year 2008 as there are now. If this is the case, then we can expect a lot of changes within the next few years - hopefully for the better. But, this is also another subject.

http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/15/15_9_16.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZN) Gosh, there are so many points to ponder.

I have a hard time with this... I feel that God created everything. He created the opportunity for Life to be this way... He created how we are today... He created sin... He created us with the ability to sin... He created Satan... He created Lucifer.

To say otherwise is also to say that He didnt create beautiful sunsets... sure, He created the Sun, the Clouds, and the Horizon, but He didnt create them falling just as they do to create such a beautiful sunset. However, given the course of things, it is inevitible that these sunsets sill occur.

Some may argue that a sunset is part of the natural progession and by so, of course He intended it to be... I feel the same about Mankind. It is part of our natural progression and He did intend it to be this way... maybe thats not the best way to put it; rather, He intended to allow it to become this way.

Regardless of all that, He is still the Rock, His work is still perfect; For all His ways are still justice, and He is still a God of truth and without injustice; Righteous and upright is He.


I agree that he has allowed this condition to happen for a reason.
Where we differ is that you seem to be saying it's a permanent part of God's plan when the Bible tells us it isn't.

Isaiah 65:17
[ The Glorious New Creation ] “ For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind.

Acts 3:21
Whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.

Hi Starman.. I cannot, and will not begin to try and figure out what God's plans are.

I just sometimes don't understand his reasoning behind letting chaos happen all over the world. If it is a test, then I certainly hope it's finished soon.


The bible tells us that the chaos in the present situation is a consequence of a challenge to God's universal right of governing and a human and angelic rebellion which strove to prove that creatures can do better without divine guidance.


The rebels, mankind and certain angels, have been given time to prove their accusation before the universe. But we are living in the time of the end of this allowed time since the evidence is clear. Mankind cannot prosper without the blessings and guidance of its creator and rebel angels are no benfit. In fact, mankind under their influence and due to its fallen nature might very well destroy himself and all life on earth. But befoere this happens God promises to intervene.

Revelation 21:4
And God will wipe away every tear from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have passed away.”




Sammy Davis Junior, while talking to Kenny Kingston (a psychic) stated that there would not be as many religions by the year 2008 as there are now. If this is the case, then we can expect a lot of changes within the next few years - hopefully for the better. But, this is also another subject.



Does this include a religion where AI considers us its god?

Quote:
Sammy Davis Junior, while talking to Kenny Kingston (a psychic) stated that there would not be as many religions by the year 2008 as there are now. If this is the case, then we can expect a lot of changes within the next few years - hopefully for the better. But, this is also another subject.



Does this include a religion where AI considers us its god?

I just hilighted the part of the quote that indicates this is another subject..

Even though this started with the subject of AI's rights - it turned to 'religion and the soul', so the deviation from the subject was there...

I don't think God has anything to do with AIs at all.


http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/10/10_1_136.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZN)

The question can be approached from a purely ethical one in which God is not involved. Or it can be approached from a religious standpoint where God is involved. Since there are both atheists, agnostics as well as religious persons at this forum the responses to the question will vary accordingly.

Perhaps I should have qualified the question by stating that it should only be considered from a non-religious ethical point of view and asked it asked for a purely religious point of view at the religious forum.

Hmmm.. interesting conversation.

Self aware AI machine!

Persoal opinion: I challenge Science to produce a robot more intelligent than a man. It just seems logically impossible. Why do we have control over all the computers we(I mean they) make? Because, we make it! That's just how I see it. Simple enough. Btw, make sure you do have a delete/backspace/undo button, though.. just in case..

I agree that he has allowed this condition to happen for a reason.
Where we differ is that you seem to be saying it's a permanent part of God's plan when the Bible tells us it isn't.

Isaiah 65:17
[ The Glorious New Creation ] “ For behold, I create new heavens and a new earth; And the former shall not be remembered or come to mind.

Acts 3:21
whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began.

Permanent as in an eternal or everlasting part of His plan? No, I wouldn't say that. I know that the Bible tells us that He will create a new, perfect Earth for us.

Imagine if we had the ability to create worlds, as well. Imagine that we were to create a world strictly for artificially intelligent beings, created in our image. We would also give them the ability to pro-create artificial life. This world would sort of be our first test for them. We would give them free will and the rights to do as they please. However, with the first of the creations, we would lay out the moral guidelines. Given their free will, we must assume that there is the strong likelihood that they will do as we did. However again, we also leave them with the promise that if they walk the righteous path, we will guarantee them a place in a better world.

They are all hard wired to our mainframe where we would log their actions, feelings, true intentions, etc. At the time of their "death," we would judge them.

This whole time, we know how this will inevitably end.

Im not saying that God is just like us and that He, too, once lived on an Earth. But, in His all-knowing, He knows how this, too, will inevitably end.

Imagine if we had the ability to create worlds, as well. Imagine that we were to create a world strictly for artificially intelligent beings, created in our image. We would also give them the ability to pro-create artifical life. This world would sort of be our first test for them. We would give them free will and the rights to do as they please. However, with the first of the creations, we would lay out the moral guidelines. Given their free will, we must assume that there is the strong likelyhood that they will do as we did. However again, we also leave them with the promise that if they walk the righteous path, we will guarantee them a place in a better world. They are all hard wired to our mainframe where we would log their actions, feelings, true intentions, etc. At the time of their "death," we would judge them.

Are you sure Doc, that you aren't an escaped writer from the original Twilight Zone show?? LOL :D

Are you sure Doc, that you aren't an escaped writer from the original Twilight Zone show??? LOL :D

Lol no, I just escaped FROM the Twilight Zone ;)

hmmm..interesting conversation.

self aware AI machine!.. ?

Persoal opinion: I challenge Science to produce a robot more intelligent than a man. It just seems logically impossible. Why do we have control over all the computers we(i mean they) make? Because, we make it! That's just how i see it. simple enough. Btw, make sure you do have a delete/backspace/undo button, though..just in case..

But the hypothetical doesn't require the AI to as intelligent as we are. Only that it be self-aware and able to suffer at least psychologically. Let's say it has what humans say is an avwerage IQ and it is the result of an experiment why succeeded in making an AI self aware.




Imagine if we had the ability to create worlds, as well. Imagine that we were to create a world strictly for artificially intelligent beings, created in our image. We would also give them the ability to pro-create artifical life. This world would sort of be our first test for them. We would give them free will and the rights to do as they please. However, with the first of the creations, we would lay out the moral guidelines. Given their free will, we must assume that there is the strong likelyhood that they will do as we did. However again, we also leave them with the promise that if they walk the righteous path, we will guarantee them a place in a better world.

They are all hard wired to our mainframe where we would log their actions, feelings, true intentions, etc. At the time of their "death," we would judge them.

This whole time, we know how this will inevitably end.

Im not saying that God is just like us and that He, too, once lived on an Earth. But, in His all-knowing, He knows how this, too, will inevitably end.

So essentially what you are saying is that these AI creatures deserve approximately the same rights we have with the same restriction of cause and effect due to obedience or disobediennce to their creator. You also seem to be saying that we as their creator deserve their obedience based on being its creator alone.

SO if these AI's would demand to be their own guides as to rules among themselves trhen we would be justified in pressing the erase button?

Starman-

SO if these AI's would demand to be their own guides as to rules among themselves trhen we would be justified in pressing the erase button?
Brings to mind the reason for the great flood.

SO if these AI's would demand to be their own guides as to rules among themselves trhen we would be justified in pressing the erase button?

Isn't God justified in the same way?

Isnt God justified in the same way?


True, and the reason is that there can't be peace on earth unless his intelligent creation do things within the parameters of his instructions.


Taliman:

The AI erasure and Noachian Flood comparison fits better if only those AI's unwilling to follow the recommended program which keeps the system working properly are erased. Remember Noah and his family survived.