601
The Flood / Re: Moral Dilemma
« on: May 29, 2016, 01:15:22 PM »
I'm not giving you information to label me within one of kohlberg's stages.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to. 601
The Flood / Re: Moral Dilemma« on: May 29, 2016, 01:15:22 PM »
I'm not giving you information to label me within one of kohlberg's stages.
602
The Flood / Re: Does this guy still post on Bnet?« on: May 28, 2016, 10:37:08 PM »That's A Cheese Potatono it isn't, petitminou is Canadian, cheese potato is Australian. 603
The Flood / Re: Cheat don't fucking allow this« on: May 28, 2016, 09:07:11 PM »I swear if Cheat makes dislikes public in going to kill myselfI call first with your body. 604
The Flood / Re: Do you think these questions sum up your state?« on: May 28, 2016, 06:58:42 PM »
Stuff about Disney and wondering why people hate Florida, seems right to me.
605
The Flood / Re: if you gtot paid 1 milliton dollars would you wear a chastity belt?« on: May 28, 2016, 04:58:51 PM »oh, that's lame. Still, one million is worth it.Can I make it a cage instead and be a sissy slut?No because then you could still milk your prostate. Totes cheating 606
The Flood / Re: if you gtot paid 1 milliton dollars would you wear a chastity belt?« on: May 28, 2016, 04:26:12 PM »
Can I make it a cage instead and be a sissy slut?
607
The Flood / Re: If you've never roleplayed as a Japanese girl« on: May 28, 2016, 03:59:02 PM »Be nice to Ian!Tfw I'm not cute enough to wear a Japanese school girl outfit and be a slut for cock.That doesn't stop Ian. 608
The Flood / Re: If you've never roleplayed as a Japanese girl« on: May 28, 2016, 02:03:33 PM »
Tfw I'm not cute enough to wear a Japanese school girl outfit and be a slut for cock.
611
The Flood / Re: >immensely sleepy« on: May 28, 2016, 08:32:11 AM »Oh. Well, I'll keep your body somewhere where Das can't get it.Gonna die manDamn, you gonna be okay? 612
The Flood / Re: >immensely sleepy« on: May 28, 2016, 08:25:47 AM »Damn, you gonna be okay? 613
Serious / Re: If you had the possibility of creating AI, would you?« on: May 28, 2016, 05:15:08 AM »So you would let thousands of people suffer rather than just one person suffer? Yeah, that sure seems like the more moral option.Oh, I didn't know you changed the topic, never heard of that movie. And yes, I would absolutely save that child. A utopia that thrives off of someone eternally suffering isn't a utopia, and has no right to exist, regardless of how good it is.the ones who walk away from omelas is a story about a utopian society is only able to keep its utopian state due to one child suffering.What? How does the fact that I would help a kid escape from some sweatshop cause more suffering?If I had the means, sure.So, you would help one person if it meant subjecting 1000s of others to suffering? 614
Serious / Re: If you had the possibility of creating AI, would you?« on: May 28, 2016, 05:11:53 AM »the ones who walk away from omelas is a story about a utopian society that is only able to keep its utopian state due to one child suffering.What? How does the fact that I would help a kid escape from some sweatshop cause more suffering?If I had the means, sure.So, you would help one person if it meant subjecting 1000s of others to suffering? 615
Serious / Re: If you had the possibility of creating AI, would you?« on: May 28, 2016, 04:48:43 AM »If I had the means, sure.So, you would help one person if it meant subjecting 1000s of others to suffering? 616
Serious / Re: If you had the possibility of creating AI, would you?« on: May 28, 2016, 04:42:33 AM »Utility means NOTHING, in anything but a pragmatic sense. If something morally sound has utility, then great. If something morally wrong has utility, it doesn't matter. If we rounded up every homeless person and forced them into slave labor, quality of life would increase for the rest of us. But again, it would be wrong. That's the more important thing that matters.Just a side question, but would you help the child in the ones who walk away from omelas? They aren't real, they're no more than social constructs. They are literally spooks of the mind.Also, morality and human rights are a spook, just saying.You keep using that word and I don't give a shit. I don't even know what it means, but if being concerned with morality and human rights makes me a spook, then that's what I am. I have no problems with that. 617
Serious / Re: If you had the possibility of creating AI, would you?« on: May 28, 2016, 04:34:51 AM »
Also, morality and human rights are a spook, just saying.
618
Serious / Re: If you had the possibility of creating AI, would you?« on: May 28, 2016, 04:33:49 AM »And guess what - it's wrong that we turn a blind eye to kids in those sweatshops. Bad comparison.In yet you still use products whose creation was contingent on the suffering of others. Quote And a fucking bum stealing shit and living on the sidewalk is also useless. That doesn't mean he doesn't have human rights.I know how anti-utilitarianism you are, but considering how much human quality of life could increase through advanced AI being created, I find it funny how adamant you are against it. 619
Serious / Re: If you had the possibility of creating AI, would you?« on: May 28, 2016, 04:24:07 AM »Wait, so you antinatalist now too?LOL AntinatalistsI'm not going to sit here and have a big argument about consent with you, but the fact that life necessitates suffering doesn't give a reason for making new life, it gives a reason against it. 620
Serious / Re: If you had the possibility of creating AI, would you?« on: May 28, 2016, 04:23:17 AM »We created it, but that doesn't mean a thing. Just because we're intellectually capable of creating new souls doesn't mean we're morally capable of enslaving them.Ah, arguing from morality, well spooked my property. Quote No, I'm talking about sentience. The ability to feel actual pain, emotions, and pleasure. Sapience goes without saying, it's an AI; of course it can think abstractly and make decisions. That's the point of this hypothetical creation, it can learn, think, and use logic like any human. That alone is enough to give it human rights, but when you add on sentience, it's even more deserving of them. Anything that can suffer has a moral consideration to it, let alone something that can think and knows that it exists.First off, unless we're giving these AI's the works with receptors on their bodies for pain and pleasure, they aren't going to think anything of those feelings. A sexbot AI without that would not feel anything from the person fucking them. Secondly, even if they do feel those emotions, so what? It doesn't change the fact that the AI was created for a specific purpose and if it doesn't fulfill that purpose, it's basically useless. Just saying, neither me nor you are doing anything to stop sweat shops that uses kids as a means of production and willingly use products from it. If AI hit the point of sapience and sentience, we'd turn the same blind eye with no sleep lost on our part. 621
Serious / Re: If you had the possibility of creating AI, would you?« on: May 28, 2016, 03:59:44 AM »First off, everyone here needs to learn the difference between sentient and sapient. Being able to think abstractly and form opinions about scenarios is sapience. Second, even if it was able to form its own opinions, why should we afford something we created to serve us the same rights as us?Humans are coded for the exact same thing, fucking and having kids. But since we're a sentient, intelligent species, we have free agency and can break that coding. An AI is no different. If you're talking about a true AI, one that learns and is self aware, then it will start to develop an opinion of whether or not it enjoys being a sex slave to gross, desperate old men.People who want sexbots or whatever are even worse than the general advocates of this. It would be literal rape.Except a AI programed to be a sexbot would be literally coded for the purpose of providing sexual pleasure. 622
Serious / Re: If you had the possibility of creating AI, would you?« on: May 28, 2016, 03:43:24 AM »People who want sexbots or whatever are even worse than the general advocates of this. It would be literal rape.Except a AI programed to be a sexbot would be literally coded for the purpose of providing sexual pleasure. 623
Serious / Re: If you had the possibility of creating AI, would you?« on: May 28, 2016, 12:34:43 AM »Nothing morally wrong with manufacturing intelligent life and then telling them their entire existence revolves around serving us.There isn't. 624
The Flood / Re: i can't believe at 9:06 pm im gonna be the first one to point it out« on: May 27, 2016, 08:13:12 PM »it's ryle's birthday fucking turn up nerdsI was literally the first to say it on discord nigger. 625
Serious / Re: If you had the possibility of creating AI, would you?« on: May 27, 2016, 07:49:53 PM »
Yeah hell, though I'd place priority on uploading existing consciousness before making new consciousness.
626
The Flood / Re: 1x le means your ironic« on: May 27, 2016, 05:48:31 PM »Fuckin spineless prudeSo show is your tan cockShow us/me your dickonce in vegas i saw a lady put 12 boiled eggs up her cooter and then lay them sorry 627
The Flood / Re: 1x le means your ironic« on: May 27, 2016, 05:43:25 PM »So show is your tan cockShow us/me your dickonce in vegas i saw a lady put 12 boiled eggs up her cooter and then lay them cok 628
The Flood / Re: 1x le means your ironic« on: May 27, 2016, 05:38:14 PM »Show us/me your dickonce in vegas i saw a lady put 12 boiled eggs up her cooter and then lay them 629
The Flood / Re: 1x le means your ironic« on: May 27, 2016, 05:34:30 PM »3x le means your a dumbass 630
The Flood / 1x le means your ironic« on: May 27, 2016, 05:28:21 PM »
2x le means your ironicly ironic--it negates your irony-therefore not ironic
but what about 3x le? |