From: H C (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Jan 13 2006 - 18:54:05 MST
Of course there is reason to panic.
Hey, if you think advocating the rights of artificial minds is the way to
go, go talk to http://www.imminst.org/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=191&t=8631&s
her and go get something started.
This can only increase awareness of the Singularity.
>From: Phillip Huggan <firstname.lastname@example.org>
>Subject: Re: AI rights need to be implemented ASAP. But how?
>Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:12:42 -0800 (PST)
>Why will *computer programs* above a complexity threshold necessarily have
>feelings? I don't believe electrons and silicon will do it for machines
>the way ions and carbon does it for us. It is not likely any arbitrary
>computer substrate can give rise to minds. There is a fundamental lack of
>appreciation for they way our brains are different than are computer chips,
>legos, wooden abacuses, etc. Sure a program could find a blueprint to a
>mind and engineer it, then we are talking turkey. But I'm sure our
>legislators have good reason not to believe mere computer codes can be
> I don't think a mind can be tortured without an endocrine system. I
>would say that as soon as we start to involve chemical reactions or
>whatever in our mind architectures, then we have to be careful not to piss
>it off. I'm sure we have at least a decade to figure these things out,
>probably much much longer. No need to panic yet.
>Arnt Richard Johansen <email@example.com> wrote:
> First of all, it seems to be very likely that artificial minds above a
>certain level of complexity are going to have qualia. The thought
>experiment of replacing one neuron at a time ensures that it feels just as
>real to be a simulated brain as a biological brain. When it comes to
>artificial minds that are built on different systems than that of a
>biological neural network, the image is less certain, but it seems
>reasonable to suppose that qualia arises from simple properties that are
>common to most system that we would describe as "thinking" instead of
>merely "calculating", rather than a more complex set of properties that is
>unique to a neural network. At least the possibility of artificial minds
>with qualia cannot be ruled out!
>I think it is very important that artificial minds be given these rights
>as soon as possible. Preferably *before* the appearance of the first
>real-time human-level brain simulation, or any other human-level AI.
>How can we protect the earliest simulated minds against termination or
>torture? Legislation is an option, but it is hard to gain consensus to
>award rights to a class of entities that does not yet exist, and may not
>ever come to exist. Also, we have the major challenge on how to get SL<1
>legislators to understand that numbers inside a computer can have feelings
> Got holiday prints? See all the ways to get quality prints in your hands
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:55 MDT