Should we grant artificial intelligence rights?

Author: Analgesic.Spectre

Posts

Total: 45
#31
drafterman
drafterman's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 5,653
3
6
9
drafterman's avatar
drafterman
3
6
9
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
Hence my initial issue with a mere quote: it is horrendously vague.
If you want specificity in answers then you need to provide specificity in the question.

You asked if AI should be granted "rights." This is a generic and open-ended question. Most people would interpret this as the general ability for an AI to be granted any rights at all rather than a question about AI being granted all possible rights, no matter how insane.

Again, I assumed too much of you. I will not do that in the future.
#32
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
I stand by my stance. Thank you all for ignoring it, it is indisputable that's the truth.

265 days later

#33
Pinkfreud08
Pinkfreud08's avatar
Debates: 17
Posts: 578
2
7
11
Pinkfreud08's avatar
Pinkfreud08
2
7
11
Well, they have intelligence and consciousness, so I don't see why not. 
#34
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@Pinkfreud08
I'm worried that the robots might turn on humanity.  We need to keep them in check to make sure they don't do that.
#35
TheDredPriateRoberts
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,383
3
3
6
TheDredPriateRoberts's avatar
TheDredPriateRoberts
3
3
6
-->
@Alec
watch the movie "ex machina"

18 days later

#36
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,074
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Alec
I think that it is somewhat naive to assume that we will always have a say in the matter.

I would suggest that the primary objective is intelligence, and not the devices that facilitate intelligence.

Rights are merely conceptual bi-products of intelligence.
#37
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
If an AI existed with the ability to seem self aware by every testable standard then I would be unable to distinguish it from a truly self aware thing even if it was not.

Under those circumstances I believe my empathy would guide me to argue for this hypothetical AI's personal rights.
#38
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,074
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@secularmerlin
Sorry to be picky.

But, "A.I's personal rights"?
#39
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@zedvictor4
I'm not sure what you are asking here.
#40
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,673
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
ABSOLUTELY NOT. They will kill us all.

A new initiative by the US Army suggests “another significant step towards lethal autonomous weapons,” warns a leading artificial-intelligence researcher who has called for a ban on so-called “killer robots.”
The Army Contracting Command has called on potential vendors in industry and academia to submit ideas to help build its Advanced Targeting and Lethality Automated System (ATLAS), which a Defense Department solicitation says will use artificial intelligence and machine learning to give ground-combat vehicles autonomous targeting capabilities. This will allow weapons to “acquire, identify, and engage targets at least 3X faster than the current manual process,” according to the notice
#41
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,074
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@secularmerlin
Personal relates to a person.

Perhaps your Freudian Slip was indicative of something more sinister than just a simple oversight?
#42
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@zedvictor4
Person to me means self aware. A self aware AI would be a person im my estimation.
#43
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,074
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@secularmerlin
Person:  A human being regarded as an individual.

I would suggest that device is a more appropriate word. 

Perhaps, once A.I. devices have learnt how to replicate themselves and communicate independently they will come up with their own language and terminology.

In fact; hasn't this already happened?


#44
secularmerlin
secularmerlin's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 7,093
3
3
3
secularmerlin's avatar
secularmerlin
3
3
3
-->
@zedvictor4
I am unsatisfied with the definition. For me human is not a prerequisite, which is not to say that I can say qith certainty that I have ever met a nonhuman person

#45
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,074
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@secularmerlin
Fair enough.