• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

If this doesn't send a chill up your spine, nothing will.

Hawkeye10 said:
The leadership of this planet has failed.

Too bad there is not a Federation of Planets to appeal to for assistance.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid we humans are solely in charge of this little blue and green planet. We're not being very good stewards, are we?
 
Dittohead not! said:
I'm afraid we humans are solely in charge of this little blue and green planet. We're not being very good stewards, are we?
Click to expand...

For instance the best thing we could do for the planet as well as for humans is to do population control....but notice how we cant even talk about that, how that is outsides the bounds of acceptable thinking as well as talking.

Think about that for 5 minutes and see what happens.

:2wave:
 
CMPancake said:
Skynet, 1985, Apollo Shrugged, who knows? Morality needs to evolve with technology and when it doesn't we get incidences of mass domestic surveillance like the Patriot Act or Cambridge Analytica. I can't assess what will be and wouldn't be kosher for civilian populations at large 10-15 years from now if we get aircraft that can strike nefarious targets at the same, or more effectively than trained personnel. What if we got to a point where AI can distinguish nefarious activity better than trained personnel; would you still want flawed humans to make those decisions or trust technology that is demonstrably better at the job?
Click to expand...

CMPancake:

To those who would embrace and use such technology with enthusiasm, there is no higher morality than power for power's sake. Realpolitik, greed, appetite, unfettered ambition, power-lust, and "interests" will trump ethics and morality among those who would rule us as our masters. Whether their weapons are human-directed or lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) is immaterial as long as the desire to kill in the service of power and the desire to control others forcibly persists among those with deep enough pockets to afford such weapon systems. All this offers is inhuman persistence and craven deniability to those who have already decided that human life and all other types of life are cheap and may be impediments to the realisation of their ambitions and appetites. Cynical thinking perhaps, but unfortunately also true in many cases.

Cheers?
Evilroddy.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
For instance the best thing we could do for the planet as well as for humans is to do population control....but notice how we cant even talk about that, how that is outsides the bounds of acceptable thinking as well as talking.

Think about that for 5 minutes and see what happens.

:2wave:
Click to expand...

Sooner or later, either human aggression or Mother Nature will see to it that the population is reduced, one way or another.
 
We're doing it wrong. :doh

1.A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2.A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3.A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Those who fail to read science fiction dystopias are doomed to create them?
 
TTB said:
We're doing it wrong. :doh

1.A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2.A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3.A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Those who fail to read science fiction dystopias are doomed to create them?
Click to expand...
Oh, yes, the three laws of robotics. Isaac Asimov, wasn't it?

I'm thinking Farhenheit 451 and the interesting little robot described there.
 
"Hello, Dave.

I know I've made some very poor decisions recently, but I can give you my complete assurance that my work will be back to normal. I've still got the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission. And I want to help you."
 
Last edited:
Dittohead not! said:
Sooner or later, either human aggression or Mother Nature will see to it that the population is reduced, one way or another.
Click to expand...

This is true, but the idea is to avoid all that pain, or as much as we can, through sound management.

We are not the slightest bit interested in that.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
This is true, but the idea is to avoid all that pain, or as much as we can, through sound management.

We are not the slightest bit interested in that.
Click to expand...

Obviously not. We humans are lousy managers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom