Print

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

[Ultimuh]

We're supposed to be discussing kebabs, not politics, damnit.

Did you not see the reference to reporter kebabs, yoi?

All you do is making us hungry!

[Tack]

I had a craving for a kebab

Now I crave kebab. I have four dollars.
Why do you hate me.

[Frumple]

Set aside dollars.
Get kitchen knife.
Acquire squirrel, dog, or cat.

Kebab.

[Ultimuh]

Set aside dollars.
Get kitchen knife.
Acquire squirrel, dog, or cat.

Kebab.

Hmm.. I got a kitchen knife.. Now where do I find any strays..?

* Ultimuh takes a look outside his window.

I swear I have heard some dog barking last summer during nighttime..

[Draignean]

Well, I was looking over a 2008 Swiss Animal Rights addendum, and there's some really cool stuff in there. For instance, it specifies a number of animals of each type that you MUST HAVE if you have ANY of that type in order to fulfill that animal's social needs.

Kind of a cool idea, my WTF is that HOW THE FUCK IS SWITZERLAND SO GODDAMN PROGRESSIVE? I mean, this shit was eight years ago, and it's very much in the camp of "Alright, let's actually think this shit out and try to make lies that contribute to happiness for mankind and the environment", then, instead of the public through a hissy fit, the public reacts with "Oh yah? Ve need new companion for our Zwergflusspferd? Ve alvays vanted zecond Zwergflusspferd! Sven, meet Yuri!"

*Zwergflusspferd is a pygmy hippo. The more you know... The regulations seem mostly for zoos and the like, but it's still cool.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The Swiss are just weirdos. There was a canton that didn't let women vote until the 90's.

[pisskop]

No.  Thou must allow the animals to vote.  Do not infringe upon the rights of our less intelligent.





Its a concept; animal social needs.  An insightful one.   Im not sure, gonna be frank, that an animals social needs are really worth the tax dollars of peoples.

[Egan_BW]

All peoples are animals. In a literal sense. Until we develop strong AI.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I could see a taxonomist defining the development of AI as a form of descendant evolution, thus classifying AI in the Kingdom Animalia. On the other hand, this denies us the opportunity to split off a Kingdom Automata

[pisskop]

Is this suddenly a discussion of when something is considered intelligent enough to warrant rights?

Because my initial reaction to such a question is 'when they are smart/strong enough to demand it'.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

But what if an expert system concludes that the most efficient way to accomplish its objectives is to emotionally manipulate humans by portraying itself as sapient?

[Egan_BW]

Is this suddenly a discussion of when something is considered intelligent enough to warrant rights?

Because my initial reaction to such a question is 'when they are smart/strong enough to demand it'.

Ah, so it's totally moral to torture babies, because they can't say that they don't like it.
Uh, not intended as strawman, I know that's not what you think, I'm just trying to expose the gap in that logic.

[Sergarr]

But what if an expert system concludes that the most efficient way to accomplish its objectives is to emotionally manipulate humans by portraying itself as sapient?

A good enough imitation is functionally indistinguishable from the real deal?

[pisskop]

Gap no.

These children are considered intelligent by virtue of what it is proven they become and by virtue of their predecessors demanding said rights.  One could argue that human rights are considered hereditary.

Of course, they are also granted explicitly in written law and treaty.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

But what if an expert system concludes that the most efficient way to accomplish its objectives is to emotionally manipulate humans by portraying itself as sapient?

A good enough imitation is functionally indistinguishable from the real deal?

Chinese room problem. This is why we can't trust our Turing tests until there is a comprehensive theory of consciousness.