Quote from: Spike;953280Very sad that I shall be the first to bring up the Turing Test.... and point out that as originally conceived, is essentially useless for determining sentience.  Because, yes, you could have an erstatz conversation with your toaster, and we all pretty much agree that it is not actually Intelligent, artificially or otherwise.

I would absolutely agree that a five minute text-only conversation - as the test was originally conceived - is a useless test, and trying to pass it focuses on tricks of imitating unintelligent human quirks rather than real sentience.

The larger point from the test, though, is judging intelligences by how they act - not by preconceptions of what they are doing internally. Say some aliens come down in a spaceship and we can't tell what their brains are made of. How do we tell if they are thinking, feeling beings?

Once we get to the point where I can have a sexbot that looks enough like Jennifer Connelly in Labyrinth, the rest of the philosophical/moral implications won't even register.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]793[/ATTACH]

Hard to beat Dark City era Connelly

Quote from: Simlasa;952622But if I can talk to my toaster, and if it can respond back... keep up ersatz conversation at about the same level as the average bartender (which computers can already do), then I'm going to feel a whole lot worse if I let her get full of crumbs... and be really hesitant to throw her in the bin on a whim to by a shiny new one. Unless, I can transfer her 'personality' and voice into the new one.

Howdy doodly doo!  Would you like some toast?

Quote from: jhkim;953276Within science fiction in general, there are a wide range of beings that aren't strictly Earth-like biology. It's unclear what the brains of droids are made of, though it is implied to be metal electronics like the rest of them. There was a character in Cloud City who evidently had a biological body but machine-enhanced mind (known as "Lobot"), as well as General Grievous and Darth Vader who had mostly-robotic bodies with biological minds.

Aren't General Grievous and Darth Vader cyborgs? And of course, Luke gets a mechanical hand as well. I don't think there is any explanation what Lobot is, though Id guess also cyborg.

Sure, in SF there are beings which are not Earth-like biology, but they are still biological in origin. How is that applicable in the canon SW universe?

 It seems more troubling to me that the Republic uses cloned slaves. Maybe this was some sort of symbolism from GL that the Republic was itself corrupt and fated to fall?

Quote from: jhkim;953234I'm curious - you are contrasting biological with artificial, but there is plenty of potential for artificial beings constructed using biological components. That is the oldest concept in science fiction, actually.

I would not consider that a robot.

QuoteYou evidently think that the results of genetic engineering are still life with feeling. However, what about bioengineering that assembles cells directly into a desired configuration? Would that still be life with feeling? Going further, what if the cells had different biochemistry/biomechanics than Earth life?

I'm not certain exactly what you're asking, there. Yes, I consider genetically engineered life forms, be they clones or biomechanically engineered vehicles, living things to which all concepts of morality and ethics apply.

QuoteWhat I find interesting is that some people consider even genetic engineering like cloning to produce creations that are OK to enslave - even though a clone is just like an identical twin. I think that really, the objection is that they don't like the idea of unnatural beings, and thus consider them unreal and thus lacking a true soul.

Yes, I disagree with that quite strongly. I recall a film with Andrew Garfield about that premise a few years back, where he played one of a group of clones grown for the purpose of harbouring organs. It was heartbreaking.

QuotePersonally, I think that feelings are inherently a product of the mechanics of the assembled brain - and it doesn't matter whether that brain is constructed by natural reproduction or artificial means. Hence, I do think that an artificial being can have feelings.

The difference for me is if we are discussing an organic lifeform or a programmed computer. I do think there is a line that can be drawn between the two, regardless of what science fiction may propose.

QuoteFor example, if we ran into aliens that were emotionless, but still intelligent, then I still think it would be wrong to kill them or enslave them.

well, they certainly wouldn't care...

QuoteConversely, I have no major issues with enslaving and killing chickens and other animals which do have feelings/emotions.

I do struggle with that, to be honest. And I'm not vegan, because I don't see that as an answer since I believe the same morals apply to plants, which have been proven to have emotions. But to an extent I accept my role as an apex predator. Regardless, I find the treatment of the animals we eat to be largely abhorrent. Ultimately though, while I have a definite conclusion regarding robots, I don't have any easy answers regarding the food chain.

Quote from: Tristram Evans;953330I'm not certain exactly what you're asking, there. Yes, I consider genetically engineered life forms, be they clones or biomechanically engineered vehicles, living things to which all concepts of morality and ethics apply.

The term "biomechanical" covers a wide range of possibilities, and I'm pretty sure that you wouldn't consider all of them to be living things. For example, if a vehicle has its components made of chitin created by biochemical 3D printing - that makes it biomechanical, even though the vehicle has no cells or active biological reactions, and runs on a regular electrical motor with a battery. Would you consider such a vehicle to be a living thing, because it is made of chitin?

As another possibility, someone could create a neural web using nodes with voltage-gated sodium/calcium channels (which is the chemical process for action potential in neurons), but connecting nodes together directly with wire rather than using the comparatively slow transmission process of real neurons. Would using a biochemical trigger and having similar design to nerve clusters make the web a living thing? A similar concept was the gel packs used on the starship Voyager.

There are a huge range of possibilities. In general, we have used and will continue to use a lot of the reactions found in nature in our own engineering.

Quote from: Tristram Evans;953330The difference for me is if we are discussing an organic lifeform or a programmed computer. I do think there is a line that can be drawn between the two, regardless of what science fiction may propose.

The question I'm asking is - where is that line, and how do you define it? Science fiction includes a huge array of what it may call lifeforms including nanites made of molecular machines, to even lifeforms on neutron stars made of purely nuclear components. It also includes a huge array of computers, ranging from mentats in Dune who are clearly living beings - to the gel packs on the Voyager. Among this spectrum, I think the difference is not entirely clear. Is the computer on Voyager a lifeform because of its gel packs, while the computer on Enterprise is not? And would this affect whether characters on their differing holodecks are capable of sentience?

Quote from: Tristram Evans;953330I do struggle with that, to be honest. And I'm not vegan, because I don't see that as an answer since I believe the same morals apply to plants, which have been proven to have emotions. But to an extent I accept my role as an apex predator. Regardless, I find the treatment of the animals we eat to be largely abhorrent. Ultimately though, while I have a definite conclusion regarding robots, I don't have any easy answers regarding the food chain.

Fair enough.

Quote from: jhkim;953270I agree that the engineering would affect *how* they think and feel. However, I am suggesting that they still *could* think and feel. Ultimately, the question is, what are feelings?

1) Are they produced by neurons at all, or is there some immaterial spirit that creates them?

2) Are they unique to only naturally-grown neurons? Or could artificially-generated neurons in the same configuration still produce feelings?

3) If artificial neurons could work, then do they have to have exactly the same water/lipid/protein mechanical structures that we do - or could there be differences and yet still produce feelings?


Within nature, we can see a clear spectrum from unfeeling life (such as bacteria and lichens) to life with only rudimentary nerves like jellyfish or flatworms, working up to complex nervous systems like chickens and humans.

I am inclined to think that our sentience is a result of the higher-order structure of our nervous system - i.e. how our senses, memory, and thoughts interact. I don't think it is something uniquely tied to the water/lipid/protein structure of neurons.

----------

To connect this back to games, there are a bunch of potential characters in science fiction games, including:

1) Human clones and/or humans with genetically-engineered DNA.
2) Biological constructs ranging from Frankenstein's monster to the biological replicants of Blade Runner.
3) Mixed biological and mechanical constructs, like part-flesh Terminators or DARYL.
4) Purely mechanical constructs like Star Wars droids.
5) Nanotech constructs, like the T1000 Terminator.

Any or all of these might be considered slaves. It could be interesting to ask how attitudes differ among these.

1. Not fine to enslave.
2. Not Enough Data, but Frankenstein would make a fine, if smelly, manual labourer.
3, 4 & 5: It's not called slavery, but whatever you call it, I'm fine.

Why I am reading this thread?  I am playing an AI in a game.  So, there are lots of interesting points being presented.  Some on target, some not so much.

FYI: Within the Alpha-Omega game rules, AIs cannot change bodies, nor freely upload/download to other forms or containers.  They can be wiped, or killed, by destroying their core processing container.  There are AI Killer programs within networks around the globe to keep AIs from drifting around freely within the internet, too.

LINK: Alpha-Omega RPG.wikia - Artificial Intelligence (AI)

My Character:
Alpha-Omega Player Characters : Obsidian Portal.com - SID-422

No emotions, BTW, but the smartest character in the group by almost double the statistic, and will be triple soon.

How to interact with the group?  Well, for right now, 'SID' is the medic in the group, and he takes care of all the other team members' health.  That was his 'cover' programing, and his initial design parameters.  The corporation that built SID wanted an infiltration agent to get into an Artificial Intelligence organization, and that pretty much excluded a Human.  An AI infiltrator was thought necessary to enable creative thought and improvisation during the mission.  The flaw was that his escort were bio-engineered combat androids (the reason for the ambulatory medic robot, SID's cover), which were too much flesh, not enough machines, and were wiped out by the AI's minion bots.  SID was sent back with a virus/trojan to reverse infiltrate his original corporation.

Now, SID is on the run from his original corporation, wondering if the virus will cause him other issues, and has infiltrated the party to 'hide'.  His outward appearance and programing is just a model 422 combat medic droid, although the group suspects his is much more.

They are not treating him like a slave, but a partner in the team, so far.  SID is having all sorts of issues in that his programing, experience and data references are not up to handling a free-form group of disparate individuals with competing goals and enemies SID doesn't want to harm (part initial programing, but also what he thinks is 'right', or morally correct).

Was SID a slave, and sent on a near-suicide mission, with his bio-engineered escort?  Were they given a choice of going or not?

What does SID do about stat changes and experience gains?  This is somewhat covered in the Alpha-Omega rulebook, but the company went bust before the material had a chance to grow and develop.  So, we are making it up as we go.  RPGs are not really well adapted for the fringe characters, and things like healing, developing/upgrading stats, and skills development are not very well defined for the AI characters.  Even something like the power source, and recharging are completely lacking in the core rules.

So, the background story is that SID was built 4 year ago, in which three were used to do the initial programing and skills training, and he is a hyper-smart child, with really good skills and little reference to the outside world.  He was trained for a specific mission, with a specific team, and he is way outside his design parameters now.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;324997I have something far more day-to-day that tends to keep them out: maintenance, repairs and upgrades.  It's a time and money sink that most players don't appreciate, don't account for and don't like to deal with in play.

I can see this being the big headache in the future, and really, the AI character doesn't need much but money for maintenance, repairs and upgrades.  However, these are things that all the characters should be spending time and money on, it is just glossed over because it isn't fun.  Doing reps in the gym to build those muscles, boxing in the ring to develop those combat skills, sitting in a classroom to learn about how to fix that gizmo...  All that is not done in the game world, but it would have to happen.  

My AI would plug in new parts and software, access the database, and off he would go with stronger limbs and new skills.  

There is a balance in there somewhere, and our group will find something that works for us.

SID doesn't know what is going on, except he doesn't want to be dis-assembled.  He is going with the party as a means of getting away from his origin corporation, whom he considers a threat to his continued existance.  Does he want to be human?  No.  Does he want to take over the world?  Hasn't gotten that far yet, as he is still taking it all in.  He is adopting 'missions' and establishing short-term goals as stepping stones to some future that doesn't involve him being a collection of spare parts.

What does the future bring?  Perhaps the AI child develops a personality and a soul?  If he stays a coherent collection of self-animated parts long enough.

Wow.....

 An old thread I started ages ago re-surfaces just as I've been thinking about trying to get a campaign started up again.

- Ed C.