Does AI deserve "human" rights?

[macnuke]

when true AI exist... man shall cease.

[Grizzly Willy]

Machines are designed to perform tasks. Right now I don't see a practical use for a machine with free will. AI is best applied to specific tasks. For example, using AI to organize stock at Amazon.com, using AI to analyze the stock market, using AI to help design new cars or aircraft. These AI's don't need free will, they don't need a personality, they don't need emotions.

Machines will be tools. I can't see a practical use for a machine that would make us question whether it should have rights or not.

The question is if, not should. If we have an AI that has sentience, does it get equal rights?

[Fuzzzie]

The question is if, not should. If we have an AI that has sentience, does it get equal rights?

It would take a long time for that sort of idea to be accepted. Keeping in mind that we only gave black people and women rights this last century.

It an AI gets to the point where it's rights are in question, the big trick would be defining what those rights should be.

For example, it would be impossible to torture an AI in a traditional sense. How would one define torture when applied to a computer or machine? Would the machine we created to perform a task then be a slave to that task even though human rights forbid slavery? Would machines have the right to pro-create?

Would all this then be getting away from the purpose of creating AI to begin with? To perform a task.

My gut reaction is no. A machine is not entitled to human rights. I am open to the possibility of machine rights. Keep in mind that we're only familiar with one sentient species now and we can barely take care of their rights. Who knows how machine sentience would develop and what rights it would demand.

[Norgannon the Dreamweaver]

This thread upsets me. Sentience is sentience. I dont get how people dont see this. Sentient robots that have humanlike emotions should have equal rights, saying "no" is just as bad as saying "no" to our races rights. We might one day find an alien species that is 100% different from us, robots are the same thing as to them, a DIFFERENT being. It doesn't matter if they are a created race or not, they are still sentient with emotions like us.

Though yes, it does depend on the type of robot. But if this robot is basicly a machine human, exactly like us sentient wise, then they should indeed have equal rights.

[lzsg]

It would take a long time for that sort of idea to be accepted. Keeping in mind that we only gave black people and women rights this last century.

It an AI gets to the point where it's rights are in question, the big trick would be defining what those rights should be.

For example, it would be impossible to torture an AI in a traditional sense. How would one define torture when applied to a computer or machine? Would the machine we created to perform a task then be a slave to that task even though human rights forbid slavery? Would machines have the right to pro-create?

Would all this then be getting away from the purpose of creating AI to begin with? To perform a task.

My gut reaction is no. A machine is not entitled to human rights. I am open to the possibility of machine rights. Keep in mind that we're only familiar with one sentient species now and we can barely take care of their rights. Who knows how machine sentience would develop and what rights it would demand.

Your argument, then, is that we should not develop machines to the point that they achieve sentience/sapience, no?

If it isn't, how is a true AI a machine if humans are not? What is the crucial difference?

[Coffer]

Yes, but knowing how those with power are, we'll never get to that stage. We'll be stuck with nothing more than maids.