"cr88192" <cr88192@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:6147a$489016ba$7937c448$4513@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> but, you actually have to treat humans like humans.
> >
> > AH!
> >
> >> androids could be packed into boxes or closets, and only run when and
> > where
> >> they are needed (they could be treated far worse than any humans
without
> >> raising any sympathy).
> >
> > Do we have to treat genetically modified squirrels, ferrets, rabbits,
or
> > alligators, with human brain capacity and human pro****tions as human?
Do
> > we
> > have to treat pigs with human hearts, ears, kidneys (etc. for medical
> > transplants), with human brain capacity as human? Or, just as food...
If
> > we can't treat these genetically created "workers" as food because of
> > their
> > new brain capacity, then it's likely the world can't justify treating
> > cows,
> > deer, monkeys, horses, dogs, cats, as food either due to their current
> > brain
> > capacity... If we can't treat the "workers" we "created" as food due
to
> > their brain capacity, then how can we justify treating an android we
> > created
> > that has anything more than a child's brain capacity as anything less
than
> > a
> > full human? If it's as smart as us or our children, shouldn't it be
> > treated
> > like us or our children? I.e., isn't sympathy basically judged by the
> > brain
> > capacity, adorability, and respectability, of the lifeform from our
> > perspective?
> >
>
> it is not needed, so long as they are not actually self-aware.
How do you determine self-awareness? Once you've determined it, how do
you
eliminate it, without eliminating the abilities required for intelligence?
> so, for example, they can have a human-like intelligence, but still act
and
> think like an ordinary machine, and then not raise sympathy (of course,
I
> also ended up dealing with some of these kinds of issues in some
recently
> written fiction as well...).
Why are you so interested in a "being" that you could treat non-humanely?
e.g., like an advanced vacuum cleaner...
So, if a lifeform is bruised, starved to death, or have broken bones, no
one
will raise sympathy? People currently raise sympathy over numerous small
and large animals today... in many countries, e.g., animal cruelty laws,
no
hunting laws. For an android, it might be a bit different, but the
android
is someone's property. Anyone other than the owner causing damage to an
android would commit a crime. If the owner causes damage, it costs
him/her
money to fix. Anyone other than the owner giving orders to the android
would commit a crime too. It's not community property.
> >> basically, [androids] could be a potentially cheaper alternative to
> >> humans
> > for
> >> many forms of unskilled labor...
> >
> > With all the poverty in the world, is there really a need for cheaper
> > labor?
> > With a potential worldwide population explosion on the horizon, is
there
> > really a need for cheaper labor? (The whole world could be eating
> > krill...)
> > Or, is the real need to relocate work and workers so that they can be
> > together?
> >
>
> I suspect probably most people would probably rather see the other
people
in
> the world fend for themselves or starve to death rather than be paid low
> wages (minimum wage or nothing at all...).
>
> androids could thus allow for a cheap workforce, and also for wealthier
> countries to ignore the populous of less wealthy countries (leaving them
to
> fend for themselves and so on...).
>
If you create intelligent androids, you'll make the situation worse.
There
will be plenty of newly unemployed Americans, in addition to the abundance
of poor workers already here, that will be available for work. You'd need
to solve the "how to provide an equitable lifestyle to most Americans
without them working" problem prior to unlea****ng numerous androids into
the
workforce. I.e., you'd need to find a solution that would put an end
capitalism and monetization of goods and services, without resorting to
communism or socialism, etc. IMO, that would require the ability to
produce
a huge set of identical resources and custom resources from which each
individual would choose what they want and need. The identical resource
problem can't be solved for things which are rare. But, for many things,
it
can be. With a zero-cost, infinite source of electrons, nearly all
manufacturing and farming could progress to an exceptionally low cost
structure. With such a source of electrons, you could purify ore for
free,
manufacture pure water, farm food in skyscrapers with lighting, make fuels
and medicines, etc. etc. on a huge scale for little or no cost. The
remaining costs for many industries would just be any human labor and any
limited natural resources. Such an energy source, one that is far far far
beyond the needs of humanity for thousands of years, could set the ground
work for such a society.
Rod Pemberton
|
