Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Criptfeind]

That is a very ignorant view point Sergius. Please leave.

And you are...?

Someone who can say a sentence without adding massive amounts of unfounded incorrect barely stereotypes.

[Sergius]

The problem with somebody coming in with a religious viewpoint often isn't the religious viewpoint.

It's the people who vomit at the idea of a religious viewpoint, are unable to cope, and say things that don't apply to the situation at all.

The problem isn't people who have a religious viewpoint. The problem is people that come in and try to argue from a law/Religion standpoint: it is written in X (bible, constitution of the United States, Geneva convention) that AI shouldn't be considered people. Or that they should.

I thought the idea was to think for yourself and argue whether YOU think that AI should, if intelligent enough, be considered people with rights to not die?

[Vactor]

It's not about computers, that is like thinking that any brain that you find laying in the street is a sentient creature, its about the existence of a self, the software, not the hardware.

The problem with somebody coming in with a religious viewpoint often isn't the religious viewpoint.

It's the people who vomit at the idea of a religious viewpoint, are unable to cope, and say things that don't apply to the situation at all.

I hope you're not talking about me...

[Sergius]

That is a very ignorant view point Sergius. Please leave.

And you are...?

Someone who can say a sentence without adding massive amounts of unfounded incorrect barely stereotypes.

No, what you are is a person with no standing whatsoever to tell people to leave because you don't like their opinion.

[Criptfeind]

That is a very ignorant view point Sergius. Please leave.

And you are...?

Someone who can say a sentence without adding massive amounts of unfounded incorrect barely stereotypes.

No, what you are is a person with no standing whatsoever to tell people to leave because you don't like their opinion.

That is also true.

Good thing you don't fit that last one huh?

[Grakelin]

Standing is really important here on Bay12.

Sergius is right, Criptfeind. You don't have enough cred to be in this thread. Move aside so the bigshots like Sergius can let us know what's going down.

[Sergius]

Standing is really important here on Bay12.

Sergius is right, Criptfeind. You don't have enough cred to be in this thread. Move aside so the bigshots like Sergius can let us know what's going down.

I'm a big shot? Oh cool. So I can tell you all to leave? Hey all, ya guys, please leave!

Person with standing would be a Moderator or Admin. So stop acting the victim.

[Criptfeind]

What I say may have been out of line but when you spew that hateful dribble it makes hard not to say such things.

[Grakelin]

You're a funny guy, Sergius.

I don't really like you, but you're a funny guy.

[Eagleon]

You guys are precious. All this argument and vitriol from arguments about killing fictional beings in simulated environments on an internet forum about dwarves. It makes me GIGGLE. GIGGLE I SAY.

[Nikov]

This has devolved into bickering and I can already see you're not willing to engage in a discussion with me in good faith. Vactor.

Additionally I can see the problem with the religious viewpoint isn't that it intrudes on a nice little open discussion, but that others aren't willing to respect it. Sergius.

Thank you Grakelin for saying something I'd never thought I'd hear you say; a defense of my point of view having as much a right to be heard as any other. I dare say that's 'Voltaire' of you.

Anyone wanting clarification on anything I said can send me a private message.

But before I go...

And while you

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Subtext: You

might answer these questions morally, might another

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Subtext: Hitler

answer differently with your mind

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Subtext: your life

in the balance?

Been a fun thread, bye for now. Off to play some Baystation12. As the AI.

[Sergius]

Whether I respect a religious standpoint or not is not the issue. Either it is open to debate, or it isn't. If your religion says so and so, then it is not open to debate.

You're a funny guy, Sergius.

I don't really like you, but you're a funny guy.

Oh yeah, now you're my bestest friend ever.

What I say may have been out of line but when you spew that hateful dribble it makes hard not to say such things.

Read above. If merely stating a fact offends you, then it's not my fault.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

You guys are precious. All this argument and vitriol from arguments about killing fictional beings in simulated environments on an internet forum about dwarves. It makes me GIGGLE. GIGGLE I SAY.

It'll be relevent once Toady gets DF complex enough, just you wait.

Been a fun thread, bye for now. Off to play some Baystation12. As the AI.

I'd almost be willing to endure the difficult learning curve and fanatical moderation that I hear Space Staton 13 consists of to see that.

[ECrownofFire]

Maybe we should just get away from this and say what actually counts as a "person". Maybe even what counts as "human", because we're going to end up with that eventually anyway. If you could "upload" your brain to a computer, would you still be human? And theoretically, if you could have an AI "switch brains" with a human, would either of them be human?

My thoughts on the definition of a person is basically anything that has self-awareness and is capable of "higher thought". Although the internet says that it's also defined as a human or human being (these two, strangely enough, are actually very different). Oddly enough, I find that a "person" is the easiest to define. I would define human as something with the mind of a human, a computer with an uploaded brain is still human, right? However, a human body with an AI mind is not. Then you get into all sorts of crazy stuff with "human BEING". Wikipedia says that being is defined as one's self concept though, so I suppose that'd be the mind of the body or computer or whatever.

Legally though, could an AI be sued? Or be convicted for a crime? Or would the creator be? Especially if the creator isn't responsible for its actions. Let's face it, in order to have something intelligent enough to be capable of higher thought, it probably has to have free will, otherwise it will probably come up with the same answer as the creator or something.

[Ø]

Heh, I couldn't get through five pages of this without going off to reread some of Freefall.