Welcome to the Lounge

Eddy Vluggen6-Dec-17 0:52

Eddy Vluggen

6-Dec-17 0:52

Munchies_Matt wrote:
Do try to stay on topic Eddy, it makes debating so difficult when you dont.

So we're not talking about slavery? Damn, misleading title you have there $Shucks | :-\$

Bastard Programmer from Hell Suspicious | :suss:

If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]

BillWoodruff4-Dec-17 1:20

BillWoodruff

4-Dec-17 1:20

Munchies_Matt wrote:
So we all effectively live like a plantation owner of the past, off the backs of the labour of slaves, just metal in this case, and free of the moral implications.

The past ?

«While I complain of being able to see only a shadow of the past, I may be insensitive to reality as it is now, since I'm not at a stage of development where I'm capable of seeing it.» Claude Levi-Strauss (Tristes Tropiques, 1955)

kalberts5-Dec-17 0:34

kalberts

5-Dec-17 0:34

The golden suits in the first "The Yes Men" movie are still worth a good laugh ... with a bitter aftertaste.

ZurdoDev4-Dec-17 1:27

ZurdoDev

4-Dec-17 1:27

Munchies_Matt wrote:
doctors

A lot of what doctors do can be replaced by robots now.

Munchies_Matt wrote:
lawyers

Unfortunately, they will always be around because our laws are too convoluted.

There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate from incomplete data.

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

Munchies_Matt4-Dec-17 1:56

4-Dec-17 1:56

There is an online doctor in the UK now. ie, a program that goes through symptoms and prescribes drugs.

Nathan Minier4-Dec-17 1:28

4-Dec-17 1:28

Okay...

I mean, if the premise of using a machine to perform a job has exactly the same moral equivalency as refusing people liberty and dignity while profiting off their labors, I think you need to re-evaluate the lens that you're viewing this through.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli

Munchies_Matt4-Dec-17 1:57

4-Dec-17 1:57

Nathan Minier wrote:
has exactly the same moral equivalency

I did say 'without the moral implications' of slavery. So no, I am not.

Nathan Minier4-Dec-17 2:12

4-Dec-17 2:12

Yeah, you did say that, but what basically defined a plantation owner (as opposed to a farmer) was exactly those moral implications.

I'm wrestling with any way to make that equivalency, to be honest. I think a better metaphor might be in order.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli

Munchies_Matt4-Dec-17 2:15

4-Dec-17 2:15

If the use of a term defines the morality of a practice and not the practice itself then you are on trouble. No wonder you are wrestling!

Nathan Minier4-Dec-17 2:30

4-Dec-17 2:30

The term does not exist in a vacuum, especially when the literal definition is tied explicitly to a practice. Someone is not dubbed a "Murderer" because they made coffee this morning; it's because they murdered someone.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli

Munchies_Matt4-Dec-17 3:49

4-Dec-17 3:49

But a robot is no more related to plantation ownership than coffee is to murder.

Nathan Minier4-Dec-17 4:40

4-Dec-17 4:40

And there we shall agree to disagree.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli

Munchies_Matt4-Dec-17 5:33

4-Dec-17 5:33

WTF are you on?

HOw is a robot actually like slavery? Do you actually think machines have rights, have feelings?

Nathan Minier4-Dec-17 9:30

4-Dec-17 9:30

Munchies_Matt wrote:
WTF are you on?

I'm gonna have to go with work, which might have distracted me enough to miss the "no" part of "no more" while skimming your post.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics."
- Benjamin Disraeli

Mike Hankey4-Dec-17 1:49

4-Dec-17 1:49

And then comes child robot labor laws, then unions, then anarchy?

Someone's therapist knows all about you!

Munchies_Matt4-Dec-17 1:59

4-Dec-17 1:59

This is where it gets interesting. Do we decide that machines have feelings? If they provoke an empathetic reaction in us, then we might well do, regardless of how ridiculous it is.

But the CAGW is ridiculous, yet that doesnt stop moronic left wing cretins believing in it. Smile | :)

Mike Hankey4-Dec-17 2:05

4-Dec-17 2:05

Munchies_Matt wrote:
Do we decide that machines have feelings?

I think it depends a lot on their function. Industrial robots: probably not, domestic robots: maybe? Or maybe it's not their function as much as the way we percieve them?

Someone's therapist knows all about you!

Munchies_Matt4-Dec-17 2:08

4-Dec-17 2:08

Yes, and one of the first use of robots, as we see today, is in the sex industry, where relationships are by mature much closer with man, and such feelings more likely to arise.

Given mans tendency to anthropomorphise this is probably a cert to happen.

Mike Hankey4-Dec-17 2:32

4-Dec-17 2:32

Munchies_Matt wrote:
Yes, and one of the first use of robots, as we see today, is in the sex industry, where relationships are by mature much closer with man, and such feelings more likely to arise.

First military then you're probably right about the sex aspect. God help us!

Someone's therapist knows all about you!

CPallini4-Dec-17 2:42

CPallini

4-Dec-17 2:42

"Damn, they sent me the military one!"

Mike Hankey4-Dec-17 3:11