Ethics of robot servitude article.

--NightBattery-- · Post by **--NightBattery--** » Sun Sep 18, 2011 2:51 am

APPARENTLY september is the month of robot ethics awareness so... i'll just leave this article... here.

http://stevepetersen.net/professional/p ... vitude.pdf

Stephaniebot · Post by **Stephaniebot** » Sun Sep 18, 2011 4:01 am

Interesting article, thats for sure.

Do think there is a big difference between ERS and EHS in legitimacy though. Irony is, EHS is more feasible at the moment, and thats not the best thing?

Well unless it involves turning a human into a robot, and then...

xodar · Post by **xodar** » Sun Sep 18, 2011 9:56 am

If we build them they will be machines.
Modified living matter is different, even artificially created living matter, but a machine is a machine.

Asato · Post by **Asato** » Mon Sep 19, 2011 2:21 am

xodar wrote:If we build them they will be machines.
Modified living matter is different, even artificially created living matter, but a machine is a machine.

I can see this kind of rhetoric being used to justify horrible atrocities in the future

xodar · Post by **xodar** » Mon Sep 19, 2011 3:24 am

Horrible atrocities against machines are called "vandalism". They are the destruction of others' property.

Living creatures are one thing -- they can suffer even if they aren't conscious -- and machines are another. Machines are an artificial arrangement of junk made by living creatures.

Asato · Post by **Asato** » Mon Sep 19, 2011 10:20 am

And why can't machines possibly reach the state where they can feel fear, pain, and despair?

xodar · Post by **xodar** » Mon Sep 19, 2011 2:48 pm

Asato wrote:And why can't machines possibly reach the state where they can feel fear, pain, and despair?

I don't know that they can't, but they won't unless somebody is idiot enough to make them so.
It's okay for machines to be made to appear to have emotions and feelings, especially sexbots, but why would you want one to actually have them?

It would be a deliberate creation by humans.
Is anyone going to give them a version of DNA and the ability to reproduce and thus evolve? If you do they'll compete with humans for resources.
Do you want HAL to take over?

Asato · Post by **Asato** » Mon Sep 19, 2011 8:29 pm

Because I like the idea of a sapient robot with human emotions?

--NightBattery-- · Post by **--NightBattery--** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:02 am

i was expecting asato to disagree!, ha, how funny. some human emotions are not all...enjoyable. i understand it is your fantasy, that's good, if it ever happen i hope they just make a few of those machines or you would have a repetition of us and a robot civilization asking themselves, why can't i be forever happy?, be or not to be...and collective paranoia. combo breaker.

xodar · Post by **xodar** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 12:48 pm

--Battery-- wrote:
i was expecting asato to disagree!, ha, how funny. some human emotions are not all...enjoyable. i understand it is your fantasy, that's good, if it ever happen i hope they just make a few of those machines or you would have a repetition of us and a robot civilization asking themselves, why can't i be forever happy?, be or not to be...and collective paranoia. combo breaker.

That's a possibility in that case.
Robots are handy as machines but I don't grasp why the attempt should be made to make them sentient beings. They are tools.
I don't object, as I said, to their imitating the appearance of human emotions; it could be helpful and therapeutic in some cases.

There are plenty of sentient beings and it should be our responsibility to take care of them when we have to and leave them alone otherwise.
I am not averse to trying to make some of them more intelligent; people get along well with dogs and it appears to me that they are on the verge of a kind of self-awareness, probably because they've been unconsciously selected for it by people. Maybe parrots.

That's because we are responsible for the existence of whole subspecies of such creatures. They're now companions.
But robots are something else. Simply tools.

Asato · Post by **Asato** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 6:42 pm

I just hope you wouldn't treat a sapient robot with human emotions as a tool

--NightBattery-- · Post by **--NightBattery--** » Tue Sep 20, 2011 9:32 pm

Mmmh...this is getting old.

xodar · Post by **xodar** » Wed Sep 21, 2011 12:53 pm

Asato wrote:I just hope you wouldn't treat a sapient robot with human emotions as a tool

I don't understand why some people put words in others' mouths and imply that they are immoral. Is it a lack of manners or a calculated smear? A lack of seeing what's actually said? A habit picked up from standard media?

King Snarf · Post by **King Snarf** » Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:02 pm

You know, Asato, I get that you have very strong feelings about your side of the issue. HOWEVER, it does seem like you're being VERY confrontational when people tell you that their preferences in their fantasies are different than yours. If you don't like it, then don't comment on it. Using words like "evil" and "immoral" is only going to get everybody's dander up. I enjoy coming to this board as I feel it's generally positive and judgment-free.

dale coba · Post by **dale coba** » Wed Sep 21, 2011 7:35 pm

... some very approximate thoughts, based on years of watching this board...

Some people's fantasies would serve to solve a problem.
Other people's fantasies serve to avoid problems, to define a realm apart from them.

There's always a mismatch between the two, in urgency;
those who wish their specific problem could be solved with fembots
will tend to want us all to join and validate the world where they have triumphed.

This hypothetical principle may not even apply here;
but I don't have a negative judgement on anyone - these dissonances will occur in this community,
since we come at this fascination from so many very unique angles (Stepford much, Dale?).

- Dale Coba

Asato · Post by **Asato** » Wed Sep 21, 2011 11:04 pm

Sorry, geez

The Egg · Post by **The Egg** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 12:30 am

The ironic thing I find about all of this is that most of the people I'm familiar with in this fetish have significant (if largely personal) reasons for avoiding human emotions. Now we're arguing about not only giving them to robots but allowing them due rights based on that injection of human qualities. What's the point of a fembot if I now have to legally and ethically treat it like an actual woman? What's next, a movement for fembotism, spearheaded by Galaxina Steinem? "A fembot needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle!"

Something I think robotdoll said ages ago has always struck me as being the important crux of this debate: "We don't objectify females, we feminize objects." Machines are, as they stand today, tools. They are so because they are designed for specific purposes and any deviation from those purposes is to be considered an error and to be corrected. They did not evolve over millions of years to enjoy the complex and natural flow of emotions and consciousness that we do. Just because they look human and act human does not make them human. Assuming they would also have human morals and desires is even more biased and piecemeal an argument. Assuming we should treat them as such regardless to err on the side of caution, when we have never done so with any other type of machine, is quite frankly outright asinine.

I have always considered the machine to be a perfect Buddhist; it is action personified, becoming-doing, free of ego or will of its own, neither content nor displeased with its lot in existence. It simply is, existing a a sort of acceptable nihilism. This to me seems much closer to what a robotic existence would be like as opposed to a human existence.

xodar · Post by **xodar** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 4:25 am

Yes, assuming it could be done I don't see why such a sentient robot need be built. Maybe a simple creature to see if it could be done, but that's it.
This isn't so much a matter of morality to me as a total contradiction of the purpose of robots. They are tools intended to perform tasks too boring or dangerous or such for humans or animals to do. A fembot would be for men (and that doesn't mean there can't be male bots for females -- or males) who for whatever reason -- disability, lack of time or inclination for a relationship, need to practice or learn sex -- won't or can't have a relationship with a real female. A car is better than a horse for transportation not only because it is faster and stronger but because it's disposable and feels nothing. That's not an anti-horse statement.
Of course I'd want fembots to act like real females, up to a point, but there just isn't any reason to make them into sentient beings that would bring all the baggage a real person would into a relationship. Such a situation would essentially be slavery.
We'd have to package bots with disclaimers that they are simulations and not really conscious.....

That's what I was getting at. A purpose of machines it to avoid abusing genuine sentient beings.

Asato · Post by **Asato** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 7:26 am

But machines as genuine sapient beings is what I am interested in

King Snarf · Post by **King Snarf** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 8:09 am

Asato wrote:But machines as genuine sapient beings is what I am interested in

AND THAT'S GOOD FOR YOU. But, as noted, you just won't let the topic drop; it's like you are trying to convert everyone over to your way of thinking.

dale coba · Post by **dale coba** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 8:10 am

Asato wrote:But machines as genuine sapient beings is what I am interested in

Because...?
(my sensibility is geared too differently for me to dare any guesses)

- Dale Coba

King Snarf · Post by **King Snarf** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 10:15 am

dale coba wrote:
Asato wrote:But machines as genuine sapient beings is what I am interested in
Because...?
(my sensibility is geared too differently for me to dare any guesses)

- Dale Coba

If I were to hazard a guess, I'd say that's the one way to guarantee a girlfriend who never busts out the "I have a headache" excuse.

The Egg · Post by **The Egg** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 1:37 pm

Well, a great deal of popular media revolving around robots and cybernetic beings leans heavily towards the whole "does it have a soul" motif: Short Circuit, Robocop, The Electric Grandmother, the various Star Trek episodes cited elsewhere, etc. The problem is that these are human stories written for human audiences whose human emotions are necessarily hijacked and manipulated for the purpose of pushing popcorn and Chevrolet adverts. From a dramatic viewpoint, we can't relate to a robot that doesn't have human characteristics on some level, but in the real world robots don't have drama. They have instructions and responses.

I'm not saying it's a topic to be avoided or anything; plenty of great media has come out of these ideas. However, the other side of the coin, being rooted in both observational and statistical data, is also interesting, and not without its own share of human drama. How would ubiquitous humanoid robots affect human society? Would they be welcomed as able and ready helpers and administrators of tasks we'd rather not do, or would they be despised as "job stealers"? How would the economy adjust, and would families be put out of work? How would various religions accept or reject them? And so forth.

xodar · Post by **xodar** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 2:24 pm

That's a good approach. They would be disruptive in society and it would be our fault. Look at colonial societies where humans, somewhat different physically and widely differt culturally, are thrown together. Those are not happy countries even for the upper class of invaders.
If sentient machine could be built it would add to the total sum of unhappiness and suffering. If they are intelligent and aware of their situation they could learn to restructure their minds without our noticing it till it's too late. It would be a moral can of worms.
If robots remain tools, however well they can mimic the appearance of emotion they would diminish unhappiness in the world.
This is why I am unhappy being accused, even by implication, of being heartless and abusive.

Possibly robots should be required to have some glitch that would prove them robots. Freezing up and repeating an advertising slogan or nonsense words 1000 times in a row every week or so... Requiring some maintenance work every couple of weeks even if they could be constructed not to..

Asato · Post by **Asato** » Thu Sep 22, 2011 6:59 pm

Well it's more like I was against the people who didn't believe machines could ever be sapient or have emotions

Ethics of robot servitude article.

Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.

Re: Ethics of robot servitude article.