A bizarre but overpowering thought entered my mind the other day: we are going to have all of the arguments we are having now about whether trans women are women all over again about whether AI/robots are people, People will argue that "AI individuals" are people, too, and have all the same rights as humans. They will be cast as victims,…
A bizarre but overpowering thought entered my mind the other day: we are going to have all of the arguments we are having now about whether trans women are women all over again about whether AI/robots are people, People will argue that "AI individuals" are people, too, and have all the same rights as humans. They will be cast as victims, complete with emotions and hurt feelings that some people don't accept them as fully human. "Robot rights are human rights" except they'll have some name for them that sounds human and blurs the line between us and them, like 'non-biological humans' (NHBs).
"People will argue that "AI individuals" are people, too, and have all the same rights as humans."
Yep, I'm pretty sure I've already heard whisperings about this. I guess it'll depend how the financial motivations shake out. Is there money to be made from treating AI as a lifeforms? Does there come a point where it's genuinely intelligent? What are the real-world implications for giving AI rights?
Again, I think'll come down to money. If giving AI rights interferes with the amount of profit that can be squeezed out of it, I don't see the debate going anywhere.
A bizarre but overpowering thought entered my mind the other day: we are going to have all of the arguments we are having now about whether trans women are women all over again about whether AI/robots are people, People will argue that "AI individuals" are people, too, and have all the same rights as humans. They will be cast as victims, complete with emotions and hurt feelings that some people don't accept them as fully human. "Robot rights are human rights" except they'll have some name for them that sounds human and blurs the line between us and them, like 'non-biological humans' (NHBs).
"People will argue that "AI individuals" are people, too, and have all the same rights as humans."
Yep, I'm pretty sure I've already heard whisperings about this. I guess it'll depend how the financial motivations shake out. Is there money to be made from treating AI as a lifeforms? Does there come a point where it's genuinely intelligent? What are the real-world implications for giving AI rights?
Again, I think'll come down to money. If giving AI rights interferes with the amount of profit that can be squeezed out of it, I don't see the debate going anywhere.
Excellent point, Steve. It's always about the money.