Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyndaran
A.I.s have the problem that you can't not program their supposed interests and personality. They have no innate anything.
But letting chance dictate what a person wants and is good at rather than genetic engineering is a perfect rationalization for safe tech.
|
Actually, what is 'innate' in this context? If causality is true, a person's mind (any person: biosophont, Ghost, citizen SAI, whatever) depends on the intertwined consequences of myriad factors before its creation/recognition (for a zygote/fœtus, that would primarily be genes), and the results of the interaction between it and the environment (upbringing, education, social interactions, biochemical interaction, and lots of other things). You could as well step back from the process of forming an AI's personality by randomising it and
not cheating at the randomiser.
Does the fact that there is a group of creators who want to deliberately design as much as possible about a given mind really change anything in terms of rights and personhood?