I would give him an E-Tank and be done with him.

"Health Care" would probably equate to a routine service, along with daily software patches. Probably also need insurance if they are going to be on the Internet. I mean Spyware and viruses are bad on a computer, but if you are the computer, they could be deadly. Also, someone who hacked the robot could see all their thoughts and manipulate their mind, alter it.

Not a nice thought.

I don't like the idea of AI. What if they come to the conclusion that they are superior and should enslave people? I mean, sounds kinda sci-fi, but I know that's EXACTLY what people have done, so why wouldn't robots?

Well think about it, though. Why would we be making robots? We would probably be doing it so that they can work for nothing, or very little, and they can be owned by people and they can be more effiecient than current robots. Sounds like slavery to me, and the robots might see it as being like that too, and to have something, which by design is stronger and more efficient than a workforce of humans, feel scorned by people cannot be healthy, not even to mention if there were several of them, or the robots became like this on mass. I'm thinking The Matrix, more than I, Robot, and it's not unreasonable to think that it may happen.

Simple, put limits on the A.I. Maybe some form of mind block on that line of thinking?

Is that ethical? To give them intelligence, but control their thoughts? Can we do that? And what if they get broken? what if a piece of code gets corrupted and they are free to think how they wish? Happens all the time. Then not only would they think they were slaves and want to rebel, but they'd also know that they were being controlled, censored to not think of that. I don't know, maybe I have been watching too much science-fiction, but something about giving robots who were created to be manipulared the ability to think and to reason doesn't seem an altogether comforting thought.

I guess the key is to let them know that they are in fact created, let them know what their purpose is, but also to treat them with compassion and respect.

Oh, and let citizens have permission to kill hackers on sight.

Isn't it really more about Sapience?

Well, while it may not be ethical to control what a robot could think, assuming we're ever able to build a sentient robot, it will be nessessary if they would be used as slaves. However, even if we do get the capability to make sentient robots, I don't think we should build them to be slaves. We could make non-sentient robots for that kind of thing. We could still have sentient robots that could do all sorts of things (sentient robot politicians anyone?), and they could be treated as humans are, with pay, health care and what not. They would have to be treated with the same sort of respect any human would get though, or else it would certainly lead to trouble (Matrix style).

Why are so many of you using the term "slave?" Slave, by deffinition, refers to people. Machines are not people. The deffinition of slave is as follows:

1. a person who is the property of and wholly subject to another; a bond servant.

2. a person entirely under the domination of some influence or person: a slave to a drug.

In the technical sense, dispite the AI, they are still machines and still tools. Tools are owned and the only rights involving them are those of the owner.

A highly intellegent robotic construct is just as much as a tool as a skycrane or a calculator. Would you say that your calculator is a slave? Or how about the computer you connect to the internet with? Is that a slave? Would you give your PC worker's comp if it got a virus while you were looking at Hentai with it? I highly doubt it.

Okay, you got us there. Although, removing the virus would work as some sort of compensation. Most human bosses don't cure your sicknesses if you become ill on the job.

That may be the definition currently, but if sapient robots were created, are you sure the term wouldn't be redefined to include them? It only refers to humans, because we've never had another creature that reason on the same levels.

Moon colony? Sending new robots up there to build it first? Dr. Cossack, I accuse you of being Sigma in disguise!

Man, this is very odd to think about. But of course, it most likely won't happen anytime soon, and when it does, we'll have been long ready for it. Kinda creepy to imagine living with a... sentient... GameBoy!

Me: Hey, Jimmy, can I play MegaMan X8 on you?
Robot (Jimmy): Why of course!
*his tummy lights up and X8 shows on his stomach*
Me: Dad, can you explain to me again why we got the Jimmy 3.0, Twinkie Winkie special edition? :|

I think we shouldn't make robots too smart, just for our own good, or just a small portion of them, but put a very very VERY good anti-virus program into them, and a lot of rules they MUST abide to, so that there will never become a future like in Terminator, The Matrix, or I, Robot.

BTW, I think a large amount of ant-like nanobots would be a pretty good idea, I must add.

Yeah, sure, a large amount of nanobots would be fine.

And then next thing you know you'd have the Moonlight Butterfly. /sarcasm

Oh, don't worry about me, RD. I'll be safely lying in my hammock in my estate on the moon by then. XP



...oh, wait, good of humanity, totally forgot about that. Oh well, too bad for them, I guess. XP

"Creature" refers to the organic and cannot refer to a man-made construct. Creating a sapient machine would be like creating Frankenstien's monster. We would be making something that could not grow and could not experiance the three stages of existance (birth, development, death).

Making such a construct would be a horrible feat. You would be creating something that could never have a true life and it would be aware of it. A life is nothing more than the development stage made of making mistakes, finding solutions, and creating memories. Life is, is short, an experiance and a man-made machine could never have such experiances as childhood.

Sapience is just another word for wisdom and wisdom comes from experiance. Something that cannot experiance a life-long development cannot be sapient. We could create resoning machines but they could never be sapient.

A machine could be made knowledgable but not wise.

Post redacted

Which is why Advanced Chess works. Advanced Chess is a team of a computer and a human VS a computer and a human.

The cool thing is, is no matter whether the human is better or worse than the computer, the end result is still that the team plays better than either part alone.

Oh, by the by, one more thing: the rules those robots should follow should be made without any loopholes, as full-proof as possible.

Yeah, we don't need Will Smith whuppin' on computer rear.

Hence why I said as full-proof as possible.



Hm, maybe I'll read it sometime, after I have finished with Keyeye and one of Sartre's books I have to read.