A Philosophical Question: Should sentient/sapient robots/AI be granted rights?

[IsaacKronenFaust]

If Big Boss himself disapproved of machine soldiers on some principle, he'd have had the Bloody Brads removed or never even allowed at Outer Heaven in the first place. He had the base built while and after Diamond Dogs was being run, so he'd make the rules. Also, look over one of my other posts that says what kind of Robots I'd want to have on my side, they wouldn't be programmed to bend to my will.

[Ad Bot]

[McZealot]

With AI soldiers you have no loyalty. You have no comradery, you have nobody to tell you 'no'. All you have is a force of yes men who will never try and correct you, never interact with you

Well, that's only if they have terrible AI. Good AI would be able to make suggestions and voice concerns.

[otto-san]

Well, that's only if they have terrible AI. Good AI would be able to make suggestions and voice concerns.

good AI in a technical sense sure, terrible AI for any practical use. in fact i'd probably say there are probably no (or very few) practical applications for artificial sentience, robots are more useful to humans as tools than as companions, and there's no reason to invest in artificial sentience for industrialized jobs cus you just want a machine that can do a specific task or set of tasks on its own. it's mostly just an area of interest for computer science.

[McZealot]

um, if I was deploying robots into a combat scenario, I'd much rather have them be flexible than unquestioning

[Satan From Wreck-It-Ralph]

um, if I was deploying robots into a combat scenario, I'd much rather have them be flexible than unquestioning

a thousand emotionless killing machines > company of marines

[otto-san]

um, if I was deploying robots into a combat scenario, I'd much rather have them be flexible than unquestioning

ai can be flexible without being sentient; problem solving skills are just a component of intelligence

[IsaacKronenFaust]

a thousand emotionless killing machines > company of marines

A company isn't even close to being a thousand soldiers.

[KruppLancaster]

a thousand emotionless killing machines > company of marines

Maybe if his PMC is budget-less but it'd be cheaper to rent some marines than to research, develop, and produce a horde of terminators.

It'd just be cheaper to replace and maintain your human force in the long run than to spend a king's ransom upkeeping a bunch of robots, because of your humans can have their own salary and do whatever to keep themselves maintained instead of robots who require bottle feeding after every scrap they get into. Have you ever had someone throw a rock at your 900,000 USD Ferrari? You will know the pain of it when your robot gets loving hit in his LED eyeballs and you need to have his entire head replaced.

On the topic of giving rights to Sentient/Sapient robots/AI, I'm not going to be in any goddamn mood if my loveboot9000 suddenly doesn't want to blow me because it has a headache. Giving them rights would be a mistake because that would grant them higher authority outside of what they are: inanimate tools to accomplish stuff.

[Nonnel]

if you don't want them to have rights, don't make them sentient. if they are sentient, they must have rights.

[Filipe]

Don't, or else it's another step for the robot massive domination

[Rigel]

Added poll to get a final community census on how many are for or against this idea.

[Maxwell.]

yes

Don't, or else it's another step for the robot massive domination

idk if this is a joke or not but what

[Juncoph]

edginess aside our only secular claim to having a superior right to liberties over everything else is our sentience

if we make something as smart as us, it should have our rights.