Poll: Robot sentience

[Ben Simon]

I just saw the video on the "problem-solving robot." It got me thinking about the classic question of robotic sentience. Should a robot that can think for itself, make independent decisions, and appear to have a personality be treated as a person? I say no, because they are artificial, and it wouldn't really have feelings or thoughts as we know them. They would just seem to. If you respond to the poll, assume that there isn't a threat of robotic uprising if you say no.

EDIT: "Ne" is supposed to be "no". I don't know how to fix that.

 

[similar.squirrel]

Lol Skynet, also bacon. Just to get that in before somebody else inevitably does.

I say yes. We give newborn humans rights. What's the difference, really?

 

[Rawne1980]

If movies have taught us anything, it's that robots shouldn't be given sentient life.

I've seen Blade runner, they will go insane and run around naked on roof tops howling at the moon and breaking peoples fingers ........ THE HORROR.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Yes...bearing in mind that such a thing isn't going to happen any time soon, at least not to any real extent.

 

[viranimus]

Meh.

I know they are doing amazing things with technology, but I rather doubt were going to see robotics coupled with AI that is capable of anything even remotely resembling sentience within our lifetimes. So... meh, let the grandkids figure it out.

 

[neoontime]

Since I didn't answer the poll, I get to say that were f--ked if we do and f--ked if we don't.

 

[TiloXofXTanto]

Of course, Sentience+kindness=humanity, what we define as humanity is simply a combination of sentience and a caring for our fellow sentients, if we do not treat them as such, we should cease treating one another as people as well.

 

[Henkie36]

Well, on one side, it acts like a person and talks like a person, so it would be moralto treat it normally. On the other side, it isn't a person. It's a machine. I'm going to dwell on what is and what isn't possible through technology, but fact of the matter is, that machines run on logic.

 

[One of Many]

Nay......I say nay again.

 

[The-Epicly-Named-Man]

Should a robot that can think for itself, make independent decisions, and appear to have a personality be treated as a person? I say no, because they are artificial, and it wouldn't really have feelings or thoughts as we know them. They would just seem to. If you respond to the poll, assume that there isn't a threat of robotic uprising if you say no.

Essentially, what your saying is "I wouldn't treat a sentient robot as a person because it's not sentient".
OT: Well yes, if a machine could think (and was self-aware like a human), it should be treated as a person. In reality, we'll probably be able to create some sort of animal like machine that functions similar to a horse, cow or modern domestic dog, in that it has instincts which humans use to help perform specific tasks, which would make a thinking robot redundant.

 

[spartan231490]

I just saw the video on the "problem-solving robot." It got me thinking about the classic question of robotic sentience. Should a robot that can think for itself, make independent decisions, and appear to have a personality be treated as a person? I say no, because they are artificial, and it wouldn't really have feelings or thoughts as we know them. They would just seem to. If you respond to the poll, assume that there isn't a threat of robotic uprising if you say no.

It depends on the robot. If it has a personality and emotions, then yes. Although, I don't think that we will ever reach that point.

however, if it only has human-level problem solving power and environment adaptation, then no. It's just a really good computer.

I'm going to say this once more, because I feel that it is important. Nothing good will come of this learning robot they made.

 

[Jfswift]

Be nice to the robots or they'll take over the world. On a serious note though.. if a robot has intelligence and is capable of independent thought it is a sentient lifeform and should be treated as such. (it would have to display a fair amount of intelligence too or I'm still placing it down on the level of animals)

 

[Falconsgyre]

EDIT: "Ne" is supposed to be "no". I don't know how to fix that.

You can edit poll options by editing the first post.

Also, I don't see people as anything other than very large, very complicated neural networks. Given a complicated enough computer, I could program you by programming every action of your neurons. Therefore, I don't see a reason to differentiate between a computer with emotions and a biological system with emotions. If we get computers that complex, they're sentient by any meaningful definition.

 

[Riptide1]

well if the robot has thoughts and feelings like say... Bender form Futerama then yes id consider it and treat it like a person

 

[XIII's Number XIV]

No. Then again... *looks at avatar*

I'm kidding. Anything, manmade or not, has rights. Why stop at robots?

Yes. Why shouldn't they? Just because they're not organic? Just because they're different? That doesn't seem like a good reason to deny them rights.

Took the words right outta my mouth bro.

 

[BrassButtons]

On the other side, it isn't a person. It's a machine.

People are machines as well, just of a different kind. We are biochemical machines.

This has been answered. The answer is yes.

I love that scene.

 

[dagens24]

If it has the ability to experience suffering then sure. But there are plenty of creatures that suffer now that we don't treat as people; animals (non-human animals anyway). I'll fight for animal rights before robotic ones.

 

[Blue2]

No, not right now. Adding another group to our society would make things more complicated. We have race issues to resolve, gender issues to resolve, religion issues to resolve, government issues to resolve, sexuality issues to resolve, and many more issues to resolve. Humanity is a mess right now and we are in the edge to just blow our selves up. In short, We need to fix ourselves before building another group.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

Only 1; they only need to fear us.

 

[Stammer]

Yes, because that is what makes a sentient being "sentient".