Report Blog Entry
(No mentions of AI generated content)
Let's say we created artificial intelligence that copied us exactly, regardless of the actual possibility to do that, they're same as us in every way, other than just being mechanical. From my experience as to how people view it, people would have no issue using them as labour, with no thought as to them actually being sentient. Is this realistically any different from slavery? I wouldn't say it is. Of course though this is a theoretical concern. But the fact is that, for humanity, any life; artificial, natural, or even spiritual for religious people, is and will be worth less than our lives to society in general. Our “us and them” mentality is what will prohibit our evolution, whether it's against other humans, or against whatever other life there may be.
Life is valuable, no matter the source.
Since there's no right or wrong here, please share what you think! :)
Comments
Displaying 3 of 3 comments ( View all | Add Comment )
bitphomet
If we were to create an AI that's genuinely sentient, treating it merely as labor without rights is eerily similar to historic forms of slavery. Historically, humanity often places its interests above other forms of life. This "us vs. them" mentality, although once useful for survival, now hampers our global unity. Addressing the rights of sentient AI would challenge our moral frameworks. To progress, society must reevaluate its biases. The advent of sentient AI could be a pivotal moment in humanity's ethical evolution.
Thanks for sharing your view on it. I fully agree that it'd be a large thing that would effectively decide our ethical future depending on what we do, sentient beings are important to give some sort of rights, and even more so with sapient beings. If we create such an AI, using them would not be so far from slavery.
by Orange Shirt; ; Report
abbwcqdorw 🫶
i personally think artificial intelligence helpers can be programmed into understanding the patterns of our emotions without concretely feeling them. but i get it isn’t your main concern. in my opinion labour, as a way of giving something to the community in order to receive wellbeing back (and not just surviving as it is nowadays), is a necessary element for self realization. so i really don’t know but if we will last enough to have this kind of technology we’ll keep working anyway (given that to last this long we should probably 100% switch to socialism). tho what i mean with all this talk is that ai don’t have to have emotions or organic needs to contemplate them as part of its knowledge. therefore for this reason using its labour without giving nothing back won’t be unethical till basically it’s still the byproduct of human labour, technically already rewarded in the hypothetical etopia.
cilica
i mean robots are created to be our slaves and to serve us til their death (or until they turn off)
but i get what you mean, if robots are created to resemble us, why program them to "know" feelings, if they are already used as slaves
if it's morally correct to use a robot to serve you for whatever the reason, why made it "feel", why you made it speak the words you could hear from your friend
it resembles us, yet it's a piece of metal that we use to serve us, it's contradictory
I see your point but I'm not sure I fully agree, while to be sure currently AI and robots in factories serve us, as soon as we replicate a human it will effectively be us. We are shaped by impressions we get throughout our lives and our senses on top of our ability to think logically, if we give an AI the ability to do all these things, I don't see anything keeping it from being worth as much as us.
But there is also a major difference between something like ChatGPT, and this theoretical actual sentience, one is a tool created for a specific purpose. With the other being much more of a what-if, I am unsure if we will ever have the technological know-how to create an artificial lifeform, or whatever we want to call it, that's this advanced. But my point still stands, that if we do or did, it should be entitled to the same rights as us. We effectively create children, but we (ignoring bad parents) should be guiding them, not controlling them.
by Orange Shirt; ; Report
maybe i didn't quite understand or i have written it differently but i completely agree with you, thank you for explaining this through
by cilica; ; Report
And thank you for sharing your view on the topic! :)
by Orange Shirt; ; Report
you're welcome ^_^
by cilica; ; Report