«12. . .78910111213. . .2425»
it was the right choice
besides what does that mean?
Working leave is like, if you have a child, or you have some injury or something happens so you can’t work, you can continue being paid despite not working so you don’t literally die, and you can pay for your medical bills, to support your child, etc. the WA is voting to get rid of it. Quite cringe.
quite bs
get nae naed workers
Shaggenheim when anarcho-neoliberalism
"anarcho-neoliberalism" is a term I wish I had never heard
stfu SAUL u don't even know what "conservatism" means
at least i don't give robots right
IT WAS ONE AI!
Smh Robotics and AI are tools. At our current level of technology it'd be foolish to believe AI are "alive", at least until they can grow and procreate self-sufficiently.
yeah sure jude
That is what i assumed it meant by AI, the reason i got rid of it was because i kept getting issues related to their programming, something that shouldn't have been a problem if they were really sentient
Not necessarily, if we somehow were able to create a robot that could be considered alive that doesn’t mean it’d be perfect. A problem with programming could be considered analogous to mental “breaks” like simple panic attacks (which is typically a defense mechanism typically gone off for the wrong reason) or literally going insane (where you just stop thinking rationally due to stress)
Your body sees an issue and acts to fix it. the fix isn’t always fitting to the issue but it still sets off the same “switch”. You’ll have a panic attack while being chased by a bear or before your 8th grade math test. It’s a useful thing to have in order to survive a bear, but you’re not going to die from your 8th grade math test.
Many times with robots and programming, it’s the same thing, whether the labels are too vague or that they “overlap”, or some other problem, when you have an error on line 845 on a 30 line program, some situation triggers a certain response although the situation is not the proper time to run that response.
Also if someone reads this and thinks it’s cringe: yes, robots as they exist currently are not alive, but theoretically there is a potential for them to be alive. The argument that “they can’t think” is idealist. A mayfly is alive, can you prove that they think? A tree can’t think at all, it doesn’t even have a brain, but a tree is alive nonetheless.
Jeez that was a lot longer than intended
I was using the traditional and most widely accepted definition of "sentience" which implies the existence of free will (even tho i dont believe in it) and the ability to change one's mind, something that the AIs had proven time and time again that they were incapable of doing. I consider humans as sentient not because we can "think" or at least think we can think, but because we can learn, we are a living program, constantly updating and writing new "coding"; however, the issues in NS implied that they were incapable of independently learning, they relied soley on the coding they were "born" with as the basis for all actions they took.
jeez that was not as coherent as I intended
Nah I get what you mean, you think they only get citizenship if they’re capable of independent thought and reason, but they later proved themselves entirely reliant on prebuilt thoughts, and weren’t able to grow in their own.
gaming boys
nodoby voting
WOOOO I finally became an anarchy! Less gooo
time for the dark ages, where no one is active.....
If y’all know you won’t be active for more than a month make sure to put it on vacation mode lol
«12. . .78910111213. . .2425»
Advertisement
