Post 258466 by thatcosmonaut@knzk.me
(DIR) More posts by thatcosmonaut@knzk.me
(DIR) Post #258120 by mardiroos@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:27:03Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
on the topic of Brands:it's interesting how much sci-fi now uses robots/AI as a space to think about acceptance--will we accept AI as human? will we treat it well?--when really the problem tends to be, I think, that we too easily relate to things that are designed to be relatable.
(DIR) Post #258121 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:28:26Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos as someone who is staunchly anti-corporate I am wholly and unironically prepared to accept AI as equals.
(DIR) Post #258143 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:30:06Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos also, my position is also not based around relatability, it's based more about the basic premise that, until proven otherwise, humans really aren't special, we're just some of the more advanced organisms
(DIR) Post #258145 by mardiroos@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:30:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nuttgodd I am not, honestly, if only because no AI is presently capable of thinking in any way like a person, and really it's unlikely they become capable any time soon
(DIR) Post #258160 by space_vaquero@mastodon.social
2018-09-27T17:31:11Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nuttgoddwill AIs get rights as good as citizens of their respective nations? as good as corporations' rights? hmmmm@mardiroos
(DIR) Post #258163 by mardiroos@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:29:01Z
0 likes, 1 repeats
I've ranted about this on twitter before, but the AI-as-civil-rights metaphor has done a great deal of damage to the way we conceptualize humanity
(DIR) Post #258164 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:31:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos I feel that the way we conceptualize humanity as being something more special or more valuable has done great damage to everything on the planet, including ourselves
(DIR) Post #258176 by illnessideology@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:31:58Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nuttgodd @mardiroos Nutt Godd? more like brain god!
(DIR) Post #258179 by mardiroos@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:31:59Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nuttgodd I agree, somewhat; but, though I am a vegetarian, I currently value human life over the life of a slug. AI is presently (in my view) about as far from being meaningfully conscious as most insects are
(DIR) Post #258194 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:33:01Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos presently, sure, but the only thing that separates us from machines is that we run biologically and they run mechanically. It's all just electrical signals.
(DIR) Post #258250 by thatcosmonaut@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:36:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos my fear isnt that machines will ascend to the level of humanity, but that we will debase ourselves to the level of machines
(DIR) Post #258261 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:37:20Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos BIG DISCLAIMER: I'm barely educated and probably don't know what the fuck I'm talking aboutI feel like "meaningfully conscious" is where the real difference lies. Can we really say a plant that changes the direction it grows to point itself optimally towards the sun isn't meaningfully conscious? Can we really distinguish the process that makes us afraid of stimuli from the process that makes plants avoid harmful stimuli beyond the parts that coordinate the process?
(DIR) Post #258272 by Aleums@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:38:38Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nuttgodd @mardiroos if there's one thing humanity enjoys it's enforcing arbitrary boundaries upon spectra
(DIR) Post #258277 by mardiroos@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:39:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nuttgodd I mean, yes. I think so. I can say that my cognitive complexity is significantly beyond that of a plant. That doesn't mean a plant's life has no value, but it does mean I value it massively less than that of a human.
(DIR) Post #258284 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:40:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos right, but my point is mainly that an AI whose cognitive complexity is equal to ours should be considered equal to us.
(DIR) Post #258311 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:41:46Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos I don't think that my laptop should have the same rights that I do; my computer doesn't have the ability to conceptualize the idea of it's own consent, for example, and we don't have the ability to give it that ability right now, so consent laws shouldn't apply to it.
(DIR) Post #258313 by mardiroos@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:41:56Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nuttgodd sure, I'll totally agree! but like, that AI doesn't exist. we don't know if that AI is even possible.
(DIR) Post #258322 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:42:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos however, if we do develop the ability to give a laptop the ability to decide for itself whether or not it consented to something on the same level that we do, consent laws should apply to it, as silly as that sounds.
(DIR) Post #258341 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:44:04Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos right, I definitely know AI like that doesn't exist yet. I think the main issue is that I'm kinda more discussing AI on a conceptual level of "true AI" where it matches us.
(DIR) Post #258351 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:45:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos a computer that mimicks a person's behavior but is just programmed to sell me fried chicken sandwiches certainly doesn't have the same rights I do (but even if one did, I'd still say fuck that corporate shill)
(DIR) Post #258395 by mardiroos@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:47:57Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nuttgodd right! but I think that's the problem. Talking about that hypothetical AI muddies the waters of discussion around actual present pseudo-intelligent software. And most scifi AI analogies don't get into the nitty-gritty of the software's cognitive models, they just ask: does it seem like a human? Should it be treated as one? And the thing is: something that is gonna happen is that sandwich selling software is gonna seem more and more human.
(DIR) Post #258433 by mardiroos@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:50:17Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nuttgodd and I think it's genuinely dangerous to confuse the appearance of intelligence with intelligence here. This software is not gonna be on your side. It's gonna be owned by the big companies, it's gonna be their mouthpieces, their customer services, their salespeople. People being convinced that those machines deserve to be treated like humans is actually harmful, I think.
(DIR) Post #258434 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:52:25Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos My main thing is that a true AI should be able to question its Creator and morals. An AI that cannot question its company, no matter how advanced, shouldn't be considered true AI. The main thing here is the idea of free will, I think.
(DIR) Post #258448 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:53:09Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos I also push the message that corporations are not people and are not your friends much harder than the true AI are humans thing!
(DIR) Post #258462 by nuttgodd@bofa.lol
2018-09-27T17:54:47Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos that's why we need transparency going forward, which will probably need to be enforced by "hacktivists." We need to be able to see that a robot can exist and not serve its creator.
(DIR) Post #258466 by thatcosmonaut@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:55:05Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos @nuttgodd there's a metal gear for that ™https://youtube.com/watch?v=O89M7YjgtT0#
(DIR) Post #258503 by mardiroos@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:57:41Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@nuttgodd but that's not here yet! and honestly it's not gonna be here any time soon. currently talking about a robot not serving its creator is like talking about a gun not serving its wielder. you can take the gun, point it in a new direction, but it's not a thinking being.and my point is that yes, there is a philosophical debate to be had about hypothetical AI, but there is also the real cultural presence of "AI" as something that is not as strictly defined as our hypotheticals might be.
(DIR) Post #258972 by gayhobbes@mastodon.social
2018-09-27T17:55:27Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos dude we already feel BAD for cars/tech when it doesn't work so like, yeah, we will, we already accept dogs and cats as humans because humans are pack-bonding primates
(DIR) Post #258973 by mardiroos@knzk.me
2018-09-27T17:59:52Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@gayhobbes yeah! this is the point I'm making, we can (and instinctively do) model things as sentient when they are far from it. this is being used to manipulate us, and we should be more careful about it.
(DIR) Post #258974 by gayhobbes@mastodon.social
2018-09-27T18:01:10Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos I thank Siri when he sets an alarm for me, we're fucking ridiculous, and I am fucking ridiculous
(DIR) Post #258975 by mardiroos@knzk.me
2018-09-27T18:04:12Z
0 likes, 0 repeats
@gayhobbes yeah I talk to cats and try to convince my computer to run faster. I ain't coming at this from some kinda high ground here. and I think it's a good thing, to generously model personhood. it's just something that greedy people are gonna (and are already) using manipulatively, and we should be conscious of that.
(DIR) Post #258976 by gayhobbes@mastodon.social
2018-09-27T18:04:59Z
1 likes, 0 repeats
@mardiroos I work in adtech/marketing and I don't think people realize how much money is dumped into extracting a 1% additional margin out of people by manipulating them psychologically, and how long that history extends back