So you're assuming that AI would somehow evolve to be completely independent and uninfluenced by the people (and their values) who programmed the pre-AI machines. Using your prescient insight, tell us how the AI will decide the question of terminating (or not) pregnancy, considering what is "best for society" and "the most fair freedom". Please be specific. Or do you claim that you don't, and maybe can't, know the answer to that, but you have "faith" that AI will infallibly determine a "right" answer? And if so, that you would unquestionably abide by whatever decisions and orders would be issued by the AI, including the fate of your family (perhaps your children would be selected as part of a depopulation program as "best for society"). Etc. Etc. Etc.

See there is a nice thing about programming,  you can see what it does.  There are no secrets if its open source.   If a robot who has no emotions and is locked down for no external influence, including its code which can be independently verified.  It will make decisions based on rules plain and simple.  Did this man rob a bank, here is the evidence that he did, here is the evidence he didn't.  If we was a repeat offender here is the rules to increase jail time.  It will not judge on race, gender or if the victim was a friend of the judge etc.  Or if the defendant didn't have money to buy an expensive lawyer etc.  It will give a fair trial.  In this case yes I would accept the decision for myself, my family etc. 

Now lets get to the law making, if it was advanced enough it can see what laws and projects should be done, it can plan those projects like for example rail.  There would be no influence in selecting contractors etc.  It would be done un-biased and un-influenced.   As for laws limited population etc that you guys all fear the robot will always follow guidelines and humans can set those.  For example to value life, freedom and liberty as per the constitution.  The AI would place these on top and make laws that respect and embolden these values.  No patriot act etc because the spying decreases the freedom of the people.  It would be pro abortion because its that persons right to freely choose what they want to do with their body.  No religion can say otherwise.  It will use science that says an unborn fetus does not have the cognitive functions and is not able to live on its own, thus it is NOT alive. These are some examples and yes I would accept the decisions, if I didn't i would legally voice my opinion with my 1st amendment and that may sway the AI to change because it serves the population not the other way around.

See there is a nice thing about programming,  you can see what it does.  There are no secrets if its open source.   If a robot who has no emotions and is locked down for no external influence, including its code which can be independently verified.  It will make decisions based on rules plain and simple.  Did this man rob a bank, here is the evidence that he did, here is the evidence he didn't.  If we was a repeat offender here is the rules to increase jail time.  It will not judge on race, gender or if the victim was a friend of the judge etc.  Or if the defendant didn't have money to buy an expensive lawyer etc.  It will give a fair trial.  In this case yes I would accept the decision for myself, my family etc. 

Now lets get to the law making, if it was advanced enough it can see what laws and projects should be done, it can plan those projects like for example rail.  There would be no influence in selecting contractors etc.  It would be done un-biased and un-influenced.   As for laws limited population etc that you guys all fear the robot will always follow guidelines and humans can set those.  For example to value life, freedom and liberty as per the constitution.  The AI would place these on top and make laws that respect and embolden these values.  No patriot act etc because the spying decreases the freedom of the people.  It would be pro abortion because its that persons right to freely choose what they want to do with their body.  No religion can say otherwise.  It will use science that says an unborn fetus does not have the cognitive functions and is not able to live on its own, thus it is NOT alive. These are some examples and yes I would accept the decisions, if I didn't i would legally voice my opinion with my 1st amendment and that may sway the AI to change because it serves the population not the other way around.

You've obviously never done any work with AI.  I have, long before movies made it a mainstream thing.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

See there is a nice thing about programming,  you can see what it does.  There are no secrets if its open source.   If a robot who has no emotions and is locked down for no external influence, including its code which can be independently verified.  It will make decisions based on rules plain and simple.  Did this man rob a bank, here is the evidence that he did, here is the evidence he didn't.  If we was a repeat offender here is the rules to increase jail time.  It will not judge on race, gender or if the victim was a friend of the judge etc.  Or if the defendant didn't have money to buy an expensive lawyer etc.  It will give a fair trial.  In this case yes I would accept the decision for myself, my family etc. 

Now lets get to the law making, if it was advanced enough it can see what laws and projects should be done, it can plan those projects like for example rail.  There would be no influence in selecting contractors etc.  It would be done un-biased and un-influenced.   As for laws limited population etc that you guys all fear the robot will always follow guidelines and humans can set those.  For example to value life, freedom and liberty as per the constitution.  The AI would place these on top and make laws that respect and embolden these values.  No patriot act etc because the spying decreases the freedom of the people.  It would be pro abortion because its that persons right to freely choose what they want to do with their body.  No religion can say otherwise.  It will use science that says an unborn fetus does not have the cognitive functions and is not able to live on its own, thus it is NOT alive. These are some examples and yes I would accept the decisions, if I didn't i would legally voice my opinion with my 1st amendment and that may sway the AI to change because it serves the population not the other way around.

That's the lamest fucking answer I may have ever seen (and that'd be saying a LOT). Besides mostly avoiding the obviously difficult questions, you actually prove my point about the impossibility of some form of "intelligence" (artificial or otherwise) having the capacity to make "value free"  "objective" decisions by listing a whole series of very obviously completely subjective values and definitions ("life", "their body", "cognitive functions", "live on its own", "life, freedom and liberty", etc.).

That's the lamest fucking answer I may have ever seen (and that'd be saying a LOT).

+1000000000000

You've obviously never done any work with AI.  I have, long before movies made it a mainstream thing.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

There are no AI's in the world as of now.  FAKE NEWS

That's the lamest fucking answer I may have ever seen (and that'd be saying a LOT). Besides mostly avoiding the obviously difficult questions, you actually prove my point about the impossibility of some form of "intelligence" (artificial or otherwise) having the capacity to make "value free"  "objective" decisions by listing a whole series of very obviously completely subjective values and definitions ("life", "their body", "cognitive functions", "live on its own", "life, freedom and liberty", etc.).

How is it hard to define freedom?  Someones body?  Cognitive functions?  I just don't get it.  They are easily tangible things. They all have definitions in the dictionary for bloodys sake.  It literally can have a list of approved definitions and see if it fits.

Lets take abortion for an example this is how to simplify it for you.

Is a human female alive?
life
līf/Submit
noun
1.the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.

yes

Is a human female sentient?
sen·tient
ˈsen(t)SH(ē)ənt/Submit
adjective
able to perceive or feel things.

yes

Is an unborn fetus alive?
no though if you were to use the broad definition everything is "alive" including the individual cells in your body.

Is an unborn fetus which has no brain sentient?
no

An AI can simple rule that since a baby is not sentient and is not capable of free emotional thought it is not alive.  Since it values freedom of a person to do whatever they want with their life including body manipulation, death etc which doesn't infringe on another persons rights it will rule that abortion is perfectly fine.

How is it hard to define freedom?  Someones body?  Cognitive functions?  I just don't get it.  They are easily tangible things. They all have definitions in the dictionary for bloodys sake.  It literally can have a list of approved definitions and see if it fits.

Lets take abortion for an example this is how to simplify it for you.

Is a human female alive?
life
līf/Submit
noun
1.the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.

yes

Is a human female sentient?
sen·tient
ˈsen(t)SH(ē)ənt/Submit
adjective
able to perceive or feel things.

yes

Is an unborn fetus alive?
no though if you were to use the broad definition everything is "alive" including the individual cells in your body.

Is an unborn fetus which has no brain sentient?
no

An AI can simple rule that since a baby is not sentient and is not capable of free emotional thought it is not alive.  Since it values freedom of a person to do whatever they want with their life including body manipulation, death etc which doesn't infringe on another persons rights it will rule that abortion is perfectly fine.

a human can do that too...

How is it hard to define freedom?  Someones body?  Cognitive functions?  I just don't get it.  They are easily tangible things. They all have definitions in the dictionary for bloodys sake.  It literally can have a list of approved definitions and see if it fits.

Lets take abortion for an example this is how to simplify it for you.

Is a human female alive?
life
līf/Submit
noun
1.the condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.

yes

Is a human female sentient?
sen·tient
ˈsen(t)SH(ē)ənt/Submit
adjective
able to perceive or feel things.

yes

Is an unborn fetus alive?
no though if you were to use the broad definition everything is "alive" including the individual cells in your body.

Is an unborn fetus which has no brain sentient?
no

An AI can simple rule that since a baby is not sentient and is not capable of free emotional thought it is not alive.  Since it values freedom of a person to do whatever they want with their life including body manipulation, death etc which doesn't infringe on another persons rights it will rule that abortion is perfectly fine.

I was going to ask "Are really that stupid?", but you have provided all the evidence required to make asking unnecessary.

I was going to ask "Are really that stupid?"

I have already asked him that and he doesn't know how to answer. 

I have already asked him that and he doesn't know how to answer. 

Strange that he seems to view this issue in a very black and white way that is almost binary. 1s and 0s. But other things, there's many shades of grey. As in 97%.

That said, not sure why you guys waste your time with him... Speaking of time, almost time for a beer. Cheers!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

a human can do that too...

No that's the entire problem on why almost half this country screams GOD MADE IT ITS ALIVEEEEE YOU CANT KILL DA FETUS MURDERRRRRR.
AI isn't religious it doesn't give a danm what your "god" or "gods" think. 

Strange that he seems to view this issue in a very black and white way that is almost binary. 1s and 0s. But other things, there's many shades of grey. As in 97%.

That said, not sure why you guys waste your time with him... Speaking of time, almost time for a beer. Cheers!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

But that's the best way to boil it down to.  Because in the end there is always a black or white answer.  Either a yes or a  no. 

There are no AI's in the world as of now.  FAKE NEWS

Again -- you know nothing about AI.

But that's the best way to boil it down to.  Because in the end there is always a black or white answer.  Either a yes or a  no.

because omni deems it so...

Is OMNIGUN, which has no brain,  sentient?
no

I vote for retroactive abortion.

Is OMNIGUN, which has no brain,  sentient?
no

I vote for retroactive abortion.

Waste of good sperm? 

Waste of good sperm? 

It's sad that out of half a million sperm, the one that made OMNI won the race. 

I think the rest of the sperm felt sorry for his, and OMNI is our participation trophy.   

Again -- you know nothing about AI.

Please show me a self aware AI that exists in the world today.  I'll give you a dollar 

Is OMNIGUN, which has no brain,  sentient?
no

I vote for retroactive abortion.

I think your just jealous

Please show me a self aware AI that exists in the world today.  I'll give you a dollar 

AI is not synonymous with "self aware".

You're now qualifying your definitions, which you didn't do before.

You're such a dishonest dimwit.

AI does exist.  Self aware is a "Terminator" SciFi capability that is impossible with today's technology.

Stop trolling.