Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Human Rights in Fenspace, or, A Loose Definition of People
Re: Human Rights in Fenspace, or, A Loose Definition of Peop
#3
Hence the codicil that established organizations can recognize AI on their own...
"Man is the animal that laughs", I say, proposing a 'humor test'..

But again, you are correct, the definition of Emotion is a sticky wicket, and can consume many pints of beer and person-hours of brain capacity.
Quote:
The definition of 'emotionally active' commonly attached to that statement runs several hundred K of suggested testing methods, lists of AI and constructs that pass, and why, and a shorter list of same that have failed.
Besides, this is Fenspace.. can you see us wrapping ourselves up in legal wrangling, when it's easier, better, more moral, and more ethical to setup a permissive framework with some controls against rogues, and just... go for it?Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979Wire Geek - Burning the weak and trampling the dead since 1979
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Human Rights in Fenspace, or, A Loose Definition of Peop - by CattyNebulart - 04-16-2007, 04:30 AM
Re: Human Rights in Fenspace, or, A Loose Definition of Peop - by Kokuten - 04-16-2007, 06:28 AM
Would defining people accomplish anything? - by Freddy Isnot - 04-16-2007, 05:23 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)