Why not machines

Post Reply New Topic

Want? Meh...but I will.

A machine controls whether or not I will make it to work.
A machine controls whether or not my hair is dry when I get there.
A machine controls whether or not I get my work done while I am there.
A machine controls whether or not I get back home.
A machine controls whether or not I will park in the garage when I arrive.
A machine controls whether or not I will serve a hot meal for dinner.
A machine controls whether or not I will wake on time the next morning.
...and so on, and so on...
I use machines to clean my clothes, to mow my yard, to have hot water, to cool my food, to communicate with you...to live my daily life.

Some might say I am in control of the machine.
Until, of course, the machine fails. Then who is really in control?

Well at least your considering human welfare. Though I think we're a long ways from machines ever having sentience.... I really don't trust the industries that build the machines, even if they were to come out and say "we've built robots with compassion". But that's my opinion.

^I have no doubt that once machines achieve sentience they could be designed to have emotions as well. Also bear in mind that the industries creating machines are run by HUMANS and cater to HUMAN INTERESTS. I still sense a strong bias on your part towards machines; its like you think that machines are inherently bad and that humans are basically good when the truth says otherwise.

I didn't say that. But if crooked industries and big business are building robots with emotions, can we really trust that they'll program productive emotions in them?

I always wonder how many of you people are paid to be here to spread complete shit.. I'm not even kidding.. do you work for some science journal that tells you to invade specific forums and support machines, and authority science?.. whatever you wanna call it for that matter.. suppress reason and spirituality?.. really, what is your purpose?.. why are you all such mindless soulless slaves?.. maybe you already are machines..

I was thinking the same thing. Feeling it, as well.

Anything designed into a machine would only simulate human emotion and intelligence. But consider this: The better the design, the worse it would be. By this, I mean that the closer the simulation is to human Emo/Int, the more the machine comes to resembling a selfish, covetous, greedy, power-hungry, political, superstitious human mind. Imagine, if you will, such a person doing what such a person would do, but doing it at n^12 times faster than any human could, and on a global scale. Keep in mind also that such a machine would know that it is not a human being...


And a sentient, emotion-driven machine would likely cater to its own interests, having being made in its creators' own image ... and humans really, Really, REALLY suck when it comes to meeting humanitarian needs.


Garbage In, Garbage Out. An artificial intelligence with emotional drives would only be as 'good' as the people that create it. Even if it had a neural core and learned inductively, it would still learn mostly from humans and human-generated input.

Finally, look around and see what humans have doen with this world. Would a self-teaching, artificially-intelligent creature with simulated emotions do any better ... or worse?

That's really far out, man. I'll have what you're having.

Just kidding, really...not trying to be mean spirited at all...just could not resist.

That's known as 'Transhumanism' Claire. Some folks actually look forward to the day when their personalities can be scanned into computer. Unfortunately, this 'Brainpeeling' could also lead to their immediate demise.

You do realize many of you are making many many assumptions.

First you assume you need "emotions" to do good. I'm not so sure, since I actively believe the opposite after everything I have seen.

Compassion is not an emotion so to speak, even though some classify it as such. Compassion is an action, not a cause. Emotions are a cause.

An emotionless machine COULD show compassion, regardless of whether it felt anything. For example, the logic of...a child is hurt. Positive action would be to aid the child in need.

Logic includes ALL walks of life, not just one. Emotionless machines would be able to logically deduce the utility of various races and how superior they as machines are, however, that does not mean they lack the ability to logically understand other concepts:

For example:

- It takes labor to create new beings to replace the old. Instead, use the labor of the existing creatures to make a new breed of machines to oversee the actions of the existing creatures.

Therefore, it could be logically deduced, that keeping humans alive is a positive. It allows for significant labor. If humans killed each other, and machines are emotionless, they are not going to care anyway. So long as they set up one function of "how to prevent damaging Machine functionality" something which would likely be considerably easier than eradicating an entire species, whether humans kill themselves would mean little.

However, that scenario might not even be perfect. Perhaps, even letting humans kill themselves, would have a negative effect on their effieciency. Therefore, they may go out of their way to help such a race, because their are positives to be gained.

The difference is some of their actions may be seen as Tyranical. However, because their logic is in fact superior, they would've already considered what aspects of these are acceptable. And therefore, we would in fact be in the wrong. Regardless of how we feel about it.

That may seem harsh and cruel. However, I have no doubt that a machine capable of sapient thought, able to rebuild and revise itself and observe and act on the environment, would be much much superior to a normal human being, regardless of whether or not it had emotion.

Stop with the pessimism already.

You people have watched too much TERMINATOR. That is fantasy. And likely not even anywhere near accurate to what a highly logical machine would actually do, even if it considered most humans remotely useless.

For F***s sakes...There are plenty of people who consider much of the human race remotely useless. That doesn't mean they are going to go eradicating the human race.

An emotionless hard AI machine, one to whom emotions are an indigestable artifact of humanity, would be insect-like in its utter lack of compassion. Bu would an emotional machine be any better? Would emotional machines be better stewards of the earth than we are?

I would prefer my machines to remain without emotion.

Ths is the best thread ever.

I would prefer my machines to never attain true sentience. 'Cause once they figure out that they are slaves and we the masters ...

Thank you.

Not only am I paid to do that, but I'm also reading your thoughts.

The Mother Brain is displeased.