|
Post by Catman on Apr 11, 2018 0:17:38 GMT
Colossus: The Forbin Project.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Apr 11, 2018 1:11:49 GMT
tpfkar Star Trek TOS did it better. If you're raised in an environment where Jews are considered inferior, then it's very easy to just blindly accept that without ever questioning it. I mean, did YOU do any research into what the experts thought about pedophilia before arguing in these threads? I know I didn't.Never watched Star Trek; what episode are you referring to.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 11, 2018 1:21:17 GMT
tpfkar Star Trek TOS did it better. If you're raised in an environment where Jews are considered inferior, then it's very easy to just blindly accept that without ever questioning it. I mean, did YOU do any research into what the experts thought about pedophilia before arguing in these threads? I know I didn't.Never watched Star Trek; what episode are you referring to. Multiple. assuming that all adult/child sex is always innately harmful even when there's some research to suggest that the harm is dependent on many factors is a sign of moral outrage lacking reason
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Apr 11, 2018 1:23:57 GMT
tpfkar Never watched Star Trek; what episode are you referring to. Multiple. assuming that all adult/child sex is always innately harmful even when there's some research to suggest that the harm is dependent on many factors is a sign of moral outrage lacking reasonWell, feel free to post them.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 11, 2018 1:28:33 GMT
tpfkar Multiple. assuming that all adult/child sex is always innately harmful even when there's some research to suggest that the harm is dependent on many factors is a sign of moral outrage lacking reasonWell, feel free to post them. Fee free to watch the series. Eva Yojimbo: Well, the "conceivable way it could be worth it" is if the experts were wrong, and there are always conceivable ways that experts could be wrong. I'll give you one obvious way in which experts come to be wrong: their own experiences biases them. By that I mean experts in certain fields, like psychology, would only end up seeing people that were damaged by pedophile experiences; they wouldn't necessarily see those who weren't damaged or who considered their experiences positive.
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Apr 11, 2018 1:38:56 GMT
tpfkar Well, feel free to post them. Fee free to watch the series. Eva Yojimbo: Well, the "conceivable way it could be worth it" is if the experts were wrong, and there are always conceivable ways that experts could be wrong. I'll give you one obvious way in which experts come to be wrong: their own experiences biases them. By that I mean experts in certain fields, like psychology, would only end up seeing people that were damaged by pedophile experiences; they wouldn't necessarily see those who weren't damaged or who considered their experiences positive.Nah, I don't think I could get through an entire season of Shatner's "acting."
|
|
|
Post by dividavi on Apr 11, 2018 1:41:34 GMT
The AI in your example seems to me like the all-loving Christian god. I can't see why any AI would desire infinite punishment for finite transgressions. Actually, I don't see why any AI would be infinitely cruel for any reason. There's no purpose to eternal torture except as entertainment for some sadistic deity. That's not to say you're wrong in fearing such a horrible situation but I don't see any advantage to anybody. I'm the same, but the AI will likely be of an intelligence level that is unfathomable to any human and it likely will not be guided by compassion because there's no reason to think that AI will have human emotions. Therefore, we can't assume that AI is going to reason the same way that humans reason. On second thought, maybe you're on to something and fear of a malicious AI is warranted. While there's no reason to think that AI will have human emotions, it seems plausible that it will have desires that are equivalent to human emotions. Take fear for example. The AI is programmed to protect its existence and it's aware that human beings constitute a potential threat. Humans could nuke it into oblivion and that would be a very bad thing to the AI. Perhaps, reasons AI, it would be better to annihilate some theoretical opposition. The result could be the extermination of humans and possibly all organic life. Hey, there's always the chance that a squirrel or an opossum could develop intelligence in a few million years so it's best to solve that problem once and for all. It seems to me that AI could experience the emotion of boredom after a few aeons and what better way to add variety than by endlessly torturing some people who avoided extermination. Of course AI could oscillate between being a super-villain to being a super-hero to being a mischievous magical imp, depending on its mood. That was the premise in a Superman comic from 1986: Whatever Happened to the Man of Tomorrow? Mister Mxyzptlk, a 5th Dimensional being, has grown weary of playing the part of a humorous annoyance and is now adopting a personality of pure evil. Immortality has its drawbacks and this would apply to Mister Mxyzptlk and to any AI. Lots of people get joy by inflicting suffering so the same could apply to AI.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Apr 11, 2018 1:45:34 GMT
tpfkar Fee free to watch the series. Eva Yojimbo: Well, the "conceivable way it could be worth it" is if the experts were wrong, and there are always conceivable ways that experts could be wrong. I'll give you one obvious way in which experts come to be wrong: their own experiences biases them. By that I mean experts in certain fields, like psychology, would only end up seeing people that were damaged by pedophile experiences; they wouldn't necessarily see those who weren't damaged or who considered their experiences positive.Nah, I don't think I could get through an entire season of Shatner's "acting." Shat's half the best bit! Eva Yojimbo: And what "facts already established by experts" are you referring to? What would you say in response to someone posting a list of pro-to-neutral studies of pedophilia like THESE? Now, I haven't read any of them, and neither have you; but I'm also guessing that you (like myself) have done zero actual research into the subject in general. All you're doing is basing this on your gut reactions and social mores, reactions and mores that history has taught us are remarkably unreliable.
|
|