CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

PostPosted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:24 pm**

(http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/12/21/robot.rights.ap/index.html)

Reality bytes: Robots could demand independence

LONDON, England (AP) -- Civil rights for robots? It could be coming.

A study released by the British government says someday robots might become so advanced, they could demand their independence.

The United Kingdom Office of Science and Innovation foresees the day when robots will be able to reproduce and think for themselves.

But don't look for a robot revolution anytime soon.

The study says independence for robots probably won't be much of an issue until the mid-21st century.

Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

-------------------------

Warn your children so they can warn their children to warn their children. :lol:

PostPosted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 7:44 pm**

Anyone seen the movie I Robot?

"I hate to say I told you so...but...."

PostPosted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:00 pm**

"I hate to say I told you so...but...."

You took the spoken phrase right out of my audio-vocal device.

It sounds so wierd, yet could be so likely.

PostPosted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 8:08 pm**

Eh interesting may need further study on Robot and society.

PostPosted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:25 pm**

Well, no matter what sci-fi movies try to tell you: robots (including persocoms...) are NOT people no matter what people think >_< I mean, it's also a different thing from animal rights. Animals were here from the start like us, but robots are somethign we created that are artificial

The United Kingdom Office of Science and Innovation foresees the day when robots will be able to reproduce and think for themselves.

How robots would be able to do that, I have no clue. Would they like, go to the factory themselves and make almost clone-like beings, or if a part falls off, would they be like a starfish and regenerate into a new mind? A head scratcher for sure... :/ But to think for itself, I say is impossible^^ I mean, they can only go as far as their programming goes... Besides, there's WAY better things to worry about instead of thinking on intellegent robots, global warming dooming man kind, or whatever else scientists think about^^

PostPosted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 10:54 pm**

Tenshi no Ai wrote: Besides, there's WAY better things to worry about instead of thinking on intellegent robots, global warming dooming man kind, or whatever else scientists think about^^

I'd say that Global Warming is something that we need to worry about now.... That along with what our next real source of energy will be are extremely important things for us to be thinking about and learning about as a society. After all, it'll only be another 50 years before we see the real and painful consequences. Please, please don't underestimate how important these things are. I, for one, don't want our children and our children's children to pay the price for our ignorance.

Sorry, I don't know if ou where being serious or not, but the mentality of "don't worry about it, the scientists will figure it out" really irks me. People need to know what our society is getting itself into. People need to know about the newer, safer, and cleaner Breeder Reactors that can reuse waste from our old power plants. Please, educate yourself about these things, they are going to be important things to know about in the coming decade.

PostPosted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 11:00 pm**

Global Warming? Eeek. I don't want to see what happens in the future. Already we have water limits in Australia (and we're the dryest continent in the world).

PostPosted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 11:05 pm**

Tenshi no Ai wrote:But to think for itself, I say is impossible^^ I mean, they can only go as far as their programming goes...

You need to study robotics, because your statements are untrue. Self-awareness in robots is being investigated at Meiji University in Japan, which has developed a robot that can discriminate between its own image in a mirror and another robot. Robots have also been built that can adapt to changing environments and even learn from mistakes. You're right in that robots are not people; but robots already exist that can think for themselves on some rudimentary level.

And by reproduce I think they mean being capable enough to build other robots.

PostPosted: **Thu Dec 28, 2006 11:23 pm**

kaemmerite wrote:And by reproduce I think they mean being capable enough to build other robots.

Ahhh, no Naomi Armitage model yet! Pooh!

Wingzero22

PostPosted: **Fri Dec 29, 2006 8:06 am**

Tenshi no Ai wrote:How robots would be able to do that, I have no clue. Would they like, go to the factory themselves and make almost clone-like beings, or if a part falls off, would they be like a starfish and regenerate into a new mind? A head scratcher for sure... :/ But to think for itself, I say is impossible^^ I mean, they can only go as far as their programming goes...

They already have programs that adapt to failure and learn from it using something called genetic algorithms.

Discover Magazine wrote:[size=75]Torsten Reil, an Oxford researcher turned animation entrepreneur, decided to borrow a page from nature and use the power of evolution to solve the problem of making a digitized character move convincingly. "First, we created a simple stick figure: It's got gravity]

Read the complete article at http://www.discover.com/issues/aug-03/departments/feattech/

PostPosted: **Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:54 am**

Besides, there's WAY better things to worry about instead of thinking on intellegent robots, global warming dooming man kind, or whatever else scientists think about^^

ikimasu wrote:Sorry, I don't know if ou where being serious or not, but the mentality of "don't worry about it, the scientists will figure it out" really irks me.

Yeah, things like global warming are not moot issues and they are definitely not going to work themselves out. Don't go dissing science. XD

PostPosted: **Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:54 am**

ikimasu wrote:Sorry, I don't know if ou where being serious or not, but the mentality of "don't worry about it, the scientists will figure it out" really irks me.

Oh no, that's not what I meant at all^^ I more meant that some people are so concerned with the world ending due to these reasons, when in reality, we don't even KNOW when the true end will come. I just used global warming as an example, in which some people think that it'll be the factor that kills the world and all. And by "better things to worry about" I meant like, not to be paranoid about the world ending and like, share God with others, you know? But anyways that's a bit offtrack^^ Just explaining myself for what I meant there...

As for those studies on robots already, I didn't even realize they were that advance already @_@... Last I've seen was that realistic robot that looks like a person and was responsive to people, which was creepy enough >_<

PostPosted: **Fri Dec 29, 2006 9:58 am**

you don't have to worry about global warming because in five million year the world will be in the middle of a massive ice age. http://animal.discovery.com/convergence/futureiswild/evolves/evolves.html

PostPosted: **Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:03 am**

Tenshi no Ai wrote:Oh no, that's not what I meant at all^^ I more meant that some people are so concerned with the world ending due to these reasons, when in reality, we don't even KNOW when the true end will come. I just used global warming as an example, in which some peopple think that it'll be the factor that kills the world and all. And by "better things to worry about" I meant like, not to be paranoid about the world ending and like, share God with others, you know? But anyways that's a bit offtrack^^ Just explaining myself for what I meant there...

I see what you're saying now.

But, yeah, the reason global warming is an issue is deeper than paranoid fear of the world ending, its to protect fucture generations from suffering from our mistakes... but I understand why someone would be realistically more worried about, say, child soliders or human trafficking... that is very dire and needs to be dealt with.

Edit: Woah, starhammer, seriously? I can't watch it because it has sound and I would bug my brother if I watched it. Five million years is a pretty long time though. XD It might be, like, too late by then.

PostPosted: **Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:09 am**

well we are all dead by then so it doesn't really matter. teh ice age kills us off. that is why the future looks so cool! And can't you just surn down the volume real real low?

PostPosted: **Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:20 am**

Back on topic, or thread gets locked. To say some have been making this thread political is an understatment.

PostPosted: **Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:21 pm**

Since robots are not as sophisticated in real life as they are in Sci Fi I really feel that this won't be much of an issue until the end of the century.Then again we were supposed to have freakin' flying cars by now so no-one can tell how much
advanced robotics will really be by the end of the century.

PostPosted: **Fri Dec 29, 2006 2:32 pm**

Golem in the temple.

It will happen.

It won't be a good day, to say the least.

EDIT: As for flying cars, the only reason that hasn't happened is because it's pointless... It creates MORE traffic problems rather than fewer, because making anything airborne means you have to worry about 3 dimensions rather than 2, and the number of problems grows exponentially... Flying is enough of a problem for professionals who have been trained for years, to put it in the hands of every citizen of age would be unthinkable...

PostPosted: **Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:18 pm**

I don't think robotic independence will be much of a problem... the primary reason is that humans are the ones that created them, and therefore will be proud to see them work as independent creatures. Ironically, they could probobly smack some sense into us concerning war and other things which humans tend to choose purely from emotions... thus it could balance things out... unless thos robots are controlled by PASCAL, PEANUT or Hakaii... then we'll just be stuck between a horrible end and an eternal game of Go Fish

.

Pascal

PostPosted: **Fri Dec 29, 2006 10:29 pm**

You know what a real safe alternative to this is? to NOT improve their AI so much that they want rights! *gasp* I mean... if we monitor and control the rate that their AI "evolves" then it should never be a problem because they are created, fake beings and not real humans. Also, demanding rights is an emotional issue (in my mind anyways), and as of yet robots are not capable of emotion.

Let's face it. God made humans special. We have emotions and we think in ways that a machine can't. If people want to try to recreate that sort of thing, I say best of luck but it's impossible.

PostPosted: **Sat Dec 30, 2006 1:22 am**

When it comes down to it, robots will only have the capabilities that humans give them. Even if we give robots what we think is "choice" or "free will" it will always be within the bounds of what we understand those things to be. In other words, even if we give robots free will it will be within the limits of the programming and that just is not the same as a genuine freedom of choice, since it is ultimately under human control. Furthermore, humans have trouble thinking objectively. We neither have enough ability or knowledge to think objectively enough to give anything we create a free will, since it will always carry the bias of the creator.

PostPosted: **Sat Dec 30, 2006 2:56 am**

Mankind should just stop trying to play God and just leave it to the Pro.

PostPosted: **Sat Dec 30, 2006 3:48 am**

Kawaiikneko wrote:You know what a real safe alternative to this is? to NOT improve their AI so much that they want rights! *gasp* I mean... if we monitor and control the rate that their AI "evolves" then it should never be a problem because they are created, fake beings and not real humans. Also, demanding rights is an emotional issue (in my mind anyways), and as of yet robots are not capable of emotion.

I daresay we can still develop AI as much as we want, and still not allow the robots to want independence. It is, of course, ridiculous to have robot rights. Humans invented robots to make our lives easier, not to be an entity to themselves. They're not living, don't have emotions, and don't deserve rights. Their free-will will be in the bounds of what the programmer chooses it to be, as Syreth said.

Though I'll have a better understanding after doing AI next semester.

PostPosted: **Sat Dec 30, 2006 9:50 am**

Warrior4Christ wrote:Humans invented robots to make our lives easier, not to be an entity to themselves.

Although some people DO want to see just HOW far they can go with technology... I mean, was there really a point in making a robot that has artifical lungs so it can play a trumpet? Not really, except it's just for show in people saying "look what we can do!"

*Is randomly reminded of The Second Rennasaince (or however it's spelled)* *shudders* That was creepy, and why robot independence would be a scary thought :/

PostPosted: **Sat Dec 30, 2006 11:31 am**

Actually I can understand if we ever getting to the point of having cyborgs where cyborgs would want to have equal rights with other humans,but that is an entirely different proposition since unlike robots cyborgs are indeed human,but with technology.
Also androids would be different from other robots since they are more human looking and would be unable to be distinguished from the general population.However it will probably be generations before we are to the point of actually having either androids or cyborgs in the general population to worry about.

PostPosted: **Tue Jan 02, 2007 11:38 am**

Well, when you think about it. What makes humans so special? God created us yes, but we are much like smart hamsters running around in a celestial maze. I donâ€™t think that our existence is such a wonder that it is irreproducible. Lets face it, God made us from dirt. We exist because God felt like making us. all our conscious thought is a series of electrical charges and chemical reactions.

To quote Morpheus:

[size=84] â€œIf real is what you can feel, smell, taste and see, then 'real' is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brainâ€

PostPosted: **Wed Jan 03, 2007 11:32 am**

The Measure of a Man on Star Trek:The Next Generation went into depth into the
issue of android/robot rights when it depicted the trial of Data.What was at issue was rather or not Data could be considered a living lifeform or just a machine.
Later on after Data was finally acknowledged to be a sentient living lifeform he used the case in the episode with the robots that apparently had evolved senitence to plead their case.His basic reason was since he was acknowledged as a sentient lifeform the robots should too,even though they did not have his humanoid appearance.At then end the robots were finally admittedly to have some form of
sentience when one deliberately sacrificed itself for the others.

PostPosted: **Wed Jan 03, 2007 3:08 pm**

In my "Philosophy of Technology" class, I had to write about this topic.

Me (Incoherent ramblings that got me an A) wrote:Question 4: Do you think that digital computers can perceive and be conscious? Does a computer need a body in order to be aware?

Can computers perceive and be conscious? The potential for computers to perceive and be conscious depends on the definitions of perception and consciousness, which are inconveniently yet expectedly under dispute.
If human consciousness is indeed nothing more than carbon-based logic gates, then it is only a matter of time before neurologists fully decode the human mind for programmers to make a perfect model of it.
If human consciousness is linked to dimensions beyond the 4 that science can measure, or if it depends on quasi-random processes such as those involved in quantum mechanics, then creating a conscious mind using the standard binary logic of computers seems impossible. But should computing technology be invented in the future that utilizes these now-unknown properties of human minds and is not founded on simple binary logic, then creating an artificial conscious mind is more feasible.
If computer consciousness is possible, a question that arises is whether or not a computer needs a body in order to be aware. One of the fundamental aspects of computer programs is that they canâ€™t possibly tell where input data is coming from, (unless they are given additional data about where input is coming from, which could easily be faked.) So, sensory information being fed from physical sight and touch sensors should make no difference to a digital mind than being fed information from virtual sight and touch sensors within a completely virtual environment. Both a physical body and a virtual body emulating a physical body have the same effect on a computer.

PostPosted: **Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:35 am**

It is not the physical presence of a body or even consciousness that makes us human.It is that we are spiritually aware of our place in the universe around us.
This is something no machine no matter how cleverly it is designed to appear human can share as it comes directly from God.

PostPosted: **Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:51 am**

Scientists continue to pursue advanced AI, despite the fact that everything in science fiction literature, film, and pop culture tells us this is a very bad idea.

I, for one, welcome our benevolent new overlords.

CAA: Christian Anime Alliance

Robot Independence.

Robot Independence.