Should humans be allowed to marry AI?

[breadisfunny]

No, fucks sake... What's this obsession with marrying?
For some it's a religious thing, in which case you certainly couldn't marry a robot/program and still claim to be living in accordance to your God's wishes, so I don't think the church should be made to accept the desecrating the union that they believe to be holy.
If you're not religious it's a deceleration of love and for practical reasons (legal, financial etc.) and the deceleration of love part can be accomplished completely without any consent or recognition from your state/government, and you should certainly not be getting benefits that are intended to support people living together and creating a family, just because you really like your program.

Have private ceremony and call it marriage or whatever the hell you wish, but you should not force a religious institution to accept it or the government to support it just because you found a program advanced enough to trick your brain into creating an emotional bond.

who the hell said anything about it in a religious/government sponsored sense? oh thats right you just did. it seems more as if they are talking about it in the context of should it be allowed?

[Tradewind]

No, fucks sake... What's this obsession with marrying?
For some it's a religious thing, in which case you certainly couldn't marry a robot/program and still claim to be living in accordance to your God's wishes, so I don't think the church should be made to accept the desecration of the union that they believe to be holy.
If you're not religious it's a deceleration of love and for practical reasons (legal, financial etc.) and the deceleration of love part can be accomplished completely without any consent or recognition from your state/government, and you should certainly not be getting benefits that are intended to support people living together and creating a family, just because you really like your program.

Have private ceremony and call it marriage or whatever the hell you wish, but you should not force a religious institution to accept it or the government to support it just because you found a program advanced enough to trick your brain into creating an emotional bond.

yah but, Waifu is real now.

[NuLogic]

AI robots with artificial wombs.......then what would we need women for?

[darkwarrior42]

Assuming it reaches the point where it could give consent, yes.

[Revi]

who the hell said anything about it in a religious/government sponsored sense? oh thats right you just did. it seems more as if they are talking about it in the context of should it be allowed?

Then what is it? Without government/state or religious recognition it's just a private celebration, and you're misusing the term "marriage". I can hold a party in my basement and tell my toaster "I do", but that doesn't mean we're married, and I certainly wouldn't be asking for permission to do so.

[apepi]

First should AI marry AI?

[Ebildays]

AI robots with artificial wombs.......then what would we need women for?

Women have dildos but we still keep men around.



*note to self*
Never google dildos images without safe search on. Well at least it saved me from a ban.

Then what is it? Without government/state or religious recognition it's just a private celebration, and you're misusing the term "marriage". I can hold a party in my basement and tell my toaster "I do", but that doesn't mean we're married, and I certainly wouldn't be asking for permission to do so.

Marriage in the government/state sense is just a contract between two people. There are benefits that you can enjoy by being married but I would not call them good enough to make marriage government sanctioned.

[Deleted]

What if we manage to create AI that are able to give birth to human babies?

Should mankind even possess such capability?!

[Deleted]

Why on earth would an AI want to marry anyone? Having access to the worlds database and all our knowledge it wouldn't take it a millisecond to realize all the things wrong with marriage and religion.

[Very Tired]

It's like we want the Christian Conservatives to come out and say their slippery slope argument was an actual slope.

[Revi]

Marriage in the government/state sense is just a contract between two people. There are benefits that you can enjoy by being married but I would not call them good enough to make marriage government sanctioned.

Then whose permission are you asking here? Traditionally the ones who decide who can marry is the state, and then once they allow it the churches makes a decision within their religious communities.

If you're not asking permission from the state, and not from the church, then who? If it's an unofficial marriage why are you asking at all? I don't get it....

[tuesday the paladin]

You're better off asking should AI/sufficiently intelligent robots be given legal rights. If they maintain no rights they'd be considered property same as a house or refrigerator, in which case they couldn't enter into a contract/marriage.

[Deleted]

Why on earth would an AI want to marry anyone? Having access to the worlds database and all our knowledge it wouldn't take it a millisecond to realize all the things wrong with marriage and religion.

Funny thing is, AIs might embrace it, to a far more extreme degree than humans. AIs might be advanced computers, but we have no way to tell how their logic/moral/ethics would evolve

Also, an AI that could access the entire world's database and translate and understand it, is something that we don't even dream about right now

[Annoying]

And i dont mean the Ai we have right now, but the Ai that is self-aware (wich we will probaly make one day when we find out how human brains work and then translate it to computers).

Pretty much AI would be totaly human or at least 99.999% copy.

At 99.999% copy of a single human, that AI would be more related to to that person than other humans are related to that person (Unless that person had an identical twin). On average, biochemically any given human is 99.9% similar to any other human.

So that AI would be more human than human.

Cue Daft Punk music.

[Oneirophobia]

Well sure, if the AI has evolved to human levels. That would sort of classify the AI as its own species. A robotic species, but a sentient living creature none the less.

[Sicarius87]

Id only marry one if they had an authentic feeling vagina and actually orgasmed something other than 1's and 0's.

[Chelly]

Should mankind even possess such capability?!

There are no brakes on the science train.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q1T-lzTHrrw

Buckle up!

[Tankendog]

Since AI programming must be written by someone, it will always have the biased of the creator. Couple that with skewing its programming...

you are gonna have a bad time. It works so well in science fiction because its that, fiction. It removes all the problems currently in the AI field.

[Revi]

At 99.999% copy of a single human, that AI would be more related to to that person than other humans are related to that person (Unless that person had an identical twin). On average, biochemically any given human is 99.9% similar to any other human.

So that AI would be more human than human.

Cue Daft Punk music.

Surely it would only be more like that specific human it was based on, and not more human in general :S

[Annoying]

Since AI programming must be written by someone, it will always have the biased of the creator. Couple that with skewing its programming...

you are gonna have a bad time. It works so well in science fiction because its that, fiction. It removes all the problems currently in the AI field.

Not really. Neural networks can learn. Most of the problems in the AI field currently stem from not understanding the human brain well enough to properly emulate it.

Surely it would only be more like that specific human it was based on, and not more human in general :S

Well, yes. If it's 99.999% of a specific person, and that specific person was 99.9% similar to all other people, the robot would be 99.899001% related to all other people. Pretty good still.