I'm not sure if this question is appropriate here, nevertheless, the most direct way to find out is to ask it :)
Clearly, creating AI on a computer is a goal, and generally we'll try and implement to the same degree of computational"ness" as a human. But what would happen if we simply tried to re-implement the consciousness of a cat, or some "lesser" consciousness, but still alive, entity. It would be my (naive) assumption, that this is arguably trivial to do. We can design a program that has a desire to 'live', as desire to find mates, and otherwise entertain itself. In this way, with some other properties, we can easily model simply pets. I then wonder, what moral obligations do we owe these programs? Is it correct to turn them off? If so, why can't we do the same to a real life cat? Is it because we think we've not modelled something correctly, or is it because we feel it's acceptable as we've created this program, and hence know all its laws? On that basis, does it mean it's okay to "power off" a real life cat, if we are confident we know all of it's properties? Or is it not the knowning of the properties that is critical, but the fact that we, specifically, have direct control over it? Over its internals? (i.e. we can easily remove the lines of code that give it the desire to 'live'). But wouldn't, then, the removal of that code be equivelant to killing it? If not, why? Apologies if this is too vague or useless; it's just an idea that has been interesting me. -- silky http://www.mirios.com.au/ http://island.mirios.com.au/t/rigby+random+20
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.