What is murder?

[zogo]

Originally Posted by Phineas

But aren't there several countries where ghosts are legal citizens but bioshells are illegal?

In at least some of those countries the exception is for ghosts with bioshell versions of their original bodies.

[Kitsune]

I still maintain the position that there is no soul and that the question who is a citizen or not is made only by the law, often in an arbitrarily fashion.

Consider the following example (which also could be an idea for an campaign):
There is a Ghost, let's call him Johnny Mnemonic. He is a full fledged US citizen with all legal rights, has relatives ("acquired" before he was uploaded), bank accounts, a job, a social security number, a driving license and even a dog. Now assume that the newest safety copy of him is illegally copied and transfered to a cybershell. This copy is only a few days old and almost identically to Johnny, but it is of course considered to be a Xox since it was made without his consent and anyway, there is supposed to be only one active version of Johnny to be around. The Xoxes existence is found out and the attempt is made by governmental authorities to destroy this cybershell and its infomorph. This is done with the full consent of Johnny Mnemonic and his family - they don't want another Johnny Mnemonic out there. But the Xox sees itself as innocent, it isn't his fault that he came into being after all, so he tries to escape. And he succeeds.
And now assume that, two days later, something terrible happens. A longstanding enemy of Johnny Mnemonic, call him William D. Foe (who has nothing whatsoever to do with the Xox thing), manages to destroy his active (and legal) cybershell and all safety copies. Suddenly Johnny's Xox is the only copy left of him! It is even a rather new version, made from the latest safety copy. What now?
Should the Xox now be taken from the Black List? Should it perhaps be instantly regarded to be "the real Johnny Mnemonic"? What if Johnny's family wants this and claim that this would be what Johnny itself would have wanted? What if they claim the opposite? And if one decides that Johnny's Xox would be the "real" Johnny...has William D. Foe committed a murder in that case?
Any thoughts? Jürgen? :)

[Jürgen Hubert]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

I still maintain the position that there is no soul and that the question who is a citizen or not is made only by the law, often in an arbitrarily fashion.

True, the law is arbitrary. But like so often when it comes to laws, whether or not is arbitrary matters less than whether or not it is consistent.

Consider the following example (which also could be an idea for an campaign):
There is a Ghost, let's call him Johnny Mnemonic. He is a full fledged US citizen with all legal rights, has relatives ("acquired" before he was uploaded), bank accounts, a job, a social security number, a driving license and even a dog. Now assume that the newest safety copy of him is illegally copied and transfered to a cybershell. This copy is only a few days old and almost identically to Johnny, but it is of course considered to be a Xox since it was made without his consent and anyway, there is supposed to be only one active version of Johnny to be around. The Xoxes existence is found out and the attempt is made by governmental authorities to destroy this cybershell and its infomorph. This is done with the full consent of Johnny Mnemonic and his family - they don't want another Johnny Mnemonic out there. But the Xox sees itself as innocent, it isn't his fault that he came into being after all, so he tries to escape. And he succeeds.

Actually, if I remember correctly xoxes are not destroyed if their existence is provably not their own fault.

Still, they have it hard - no job, no income, no property, plus a fair amount of prejudice from anyone aware of their status...

And now assume that, two days later, something terrible happens. A longstanding enemy of Johnny Mnemonic, call him William D. Foe (who has nothing whatsoever to do with the Xox thing), manages to destroy his active (and legal) cybershell and all safety copies. Suddenly Johnny's Xox is the only copy left of him! It is even a rather new version, made from the latest safety copy. What now?
Should the Xox now be taken from the Black List? Should it perhaps be instantly regarded to be "the real Johnny Mnemonic"? What if Johnny's family wants this and claim that this would be what Johnny itself would have wanted? What if they claim the opposite?

The authorities will probably declare Johnny A legally dead and not change the status of Johnny B - mostly out of a desire not to encourage xoxing in any way. That being said, if the family wants to they could certainly give him part of their inheritance, and it is possible that other people will also recognize him as "the real Johnny". But that won't be enforced by the law.

And if one decides that Johnny's Xox would be the "real" Johnny...has William D. Foe committed a murder in that case?
Any thoughts? Jürgen? :)

I'd say it will be legally treated as a murder - especially since the law won't recognize Johnny A as Johnny B.

[Phil Masters]

Some people do always seem to assume that involuntary xoxes are treated as abominations to be hunted down and obliterated. I don't think that the canon material actually says that anywhere.

Admittedly, it may be the case in a number of not-nice jurisdictions. But where the thing can come to a reasonably impartial court operating under some kind of concept tof sapient rights, the xox has a good chance of presenting itself as a victim rather than a criminal. But - yes, it'll still be subject to prejudice and suspicion.

I would point this out as a darn good plot/backstory option for games. But I already used the idea in Personnel Files, and people still keep ignoring it...

[Kitsune]

@Phil:

I don't know where I assumed anything wrong.

On THS, p.120 its says:
"If multiple ghosts are conscious, then those in excess of the first are illegal; see Pan-Sapient Rights Table, p.127."

On said table the legal status of a ghost is marked as an "X" in all but two societies. In the text below it says:
"X: Abomination! If discovered by authorities, it will be incarcerated or destroyed for the good of society."

In concordance with THS canon and fully assuming that the American jurisdicition qualifies as "nice", what are the US authorities supposed to do with Johnny the Xox, at least before William D. Foe strikes? Their task would be to end the situation that there is a second Johnny ghost active. If it can be helped there is no reason to blow up the cybershell the xox runs on, of course. (That might even be stolen and the proper owner may want to have it back.) So, assuming they can apprehend it without any fuzz, they could just transfer the xox to a memory storage device. But then why should they? It is a mere copy of one of Johnny's recent safety copies plus the memories of its few days of illegal existence, so it wouldn't do nobody any good to store it for eternity. The ghost that is considered to be "the original" doesn't want it, so why not just delete it?

And assuming the xox offers resistance...why not destroy it in its cyber- or bioshell with force? The owner of the shell might want to be compensated, but the potential damage that may be caused by an illegal being which has no right to even exist may be even greater in the long run. Lets not forget: the xox is unwanted, but it contains almost all memories of a being that is regarded as a citizen. In some cases it may even be able to do a lot of damage by simply giving an interview.

Or how do you think that a xox should be taken care of?




@Jürgen:

So, a ghost program is considered to be the same being as the human it was made from, but a Xox, who is virtually identical to the last safety copy is to be regarded as a different one, even if it is the last existing version of the ghost?
This isn't meant personal, but it seems that for this handling of the matter the word "arbitrary" is an apt term. :P

[Jürgen Hubert]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

@Jürgen:

So, a ghost program is considered to be the same being as the human it was made from, but a Xox, who is virtually identical to the last safety copy is to be regarded as a different one, even if it is the last existing version of the ghost?
This isn't meant personal, but it seems that for this handling of the matter the word "arbitrary" is an apt term. :P

A "normal" ghost doesn't create a confusion about legal identity. One meatbag is gone, and one digital intelligence with the same personality arises in his place. Nice and simple. At no point has one citizen become two citizens who co-exist at the same time, so declaring them one and the same citizen doesn't create too many hassles.

However, creating a xox - i.e. activating any copy of an existing ghost or citizen SAI - suddenly creates an additional person, which immedeately begins to diverge from the first person because of different experiences. Suddenly, you have a legal nightmare! If you accept this additional person as a new citizen, then someone could easily create a large number of new citizens simply by copying himself, and all would have the right to vote, social welfare, and so on! This is why the law comes down hard on xoxes - the authorities don't want to deal with the possible negative consequences for society if this goes unchecked. Can you imagine a country where the number of ghosts rises exponentially and biosapients soon become a small minority? Most biosapients wouldn't want that, especially if most of these ghosts are the same person over and over again...

But you can't accept the xox as the same legal entity as the orignal, either. After all, what would you do if the xox committed a crime? Would you have to punish the original for it, despite the fact that it didn't do anything? Or what if one of the two went on a spending spree and left both of them in debt? Who do you hold responsible?

No, xoxing is something that most countries except the most transhumanist and open-minded would really like to avoid, and for good reason.

And thus, even involuntary xoxes aren't accepted as the same person, and they aren't given any special breaks even if the original dies - for doing so would set some ugly precedents.

[Kitsune]

Jürgen Hubert wrote:

A "normal" ghost doesn't create a confusion about legal identity. One meatbag is gone, and one digital intelligence with the same personality arises in his place. Nice and simple. At no point has one citizen become two citizens who co-exist at the same time, so declaring them one and the same citizen doesn't create too many hassles.

I understand that destructive uploading sofar helps with keeping track of numbers. But still, it's quite evident that human and ghost are NOT the same being. Since, as you put it so aptly, the fomer is a meatbag with bloodtype, DNA and fingerprints whereas the ghost is a program which has nothing of the kind. And now to say "they are the same" is quite something.

Where is the problem to simply say that there is a human that dies and a new being that is born? I mean, that is a more accurate description of what happens, isn't it? And since I don't see any advantage in especially encouraging people to have themselves uploaded, why not keep things simple?

Especially considering that there are some problems like for example in the USA where SAIs who emulate human beings are treated as citizens but SAIs who do not or do not do it well enough, are treated as mere animals. Isn't that kind of inconsistent ruling downright an invitation of critizism?

And when more and more rich and influential people are being replaced by ghosts, isn't it to be expexted that the "the machines are taking over" meme spreads in the general populace? Couldn't that lead to social instability?

Finally, as you said yourself, the hassles that are presently still avoided because of destructive ghost creation begin once somebody invents nondestructive uploading. When the first person plays "I start a sentence, you finish it" with its newly created mind emulation, everybody would see without any doubt that human and ghost are not the same being just because they think alike. And even the rich and influential would then want that even the first ghost is regarded as a mere safety copy without any rights or, if it should acquire a cybershell illegally, an unwanted xox that had better be destroyed.

So I see some disadvantages, but considering how dangerous uploading is and the fact that there are less dangerous alternatives to prolong ones life indefinitly by biotechnical means, why encourage it by artificially proposing an transferred identity?

[Jürgen Hubert]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

Jürgen Hubert wrote:

I understand that destructive uploading sofar helps with keeping track of numbers. But still, it's quite evident

You keep on saying that word. Are you sure that it means what you think it means?

I mean, it can be argued - and pretty convincing at that, just go to the RPGNet thread - that a ghost "not being the same person he was before" is about the same as a person who ages 20 years is not the same person he was before. What does "the same" mean, and how do you define that in legal terms?

that human and ghost are NOT the same being. Since, as you put it so aptly, the fomer is a meatbag with bloodtype, DNA and fingerprints whereas the ghost is a program which has nothing of the kind. And now to say "they are the same" is quite something.

Again, it is a legal fiction - with quite a few arguments going for it. It seems to beat the alternatives, in most cases.

Where is the problem to simply say that there is a human that dies and a new being that is born? I mean, that is a more accurate description of what happens, isn't it?

Is it? Really? And what of the fact that the two are more similar in thought and mind than ordinary dead man and a newborn could ever be? Wouldn't it be more accurate to call it "reincarnation with total recall of a past life", even if you accept the two as separate entities - which many people will not? Isn't it a fact that the two will have far more in common than any two people in recorded history ever had? So why not treat the two as the same legal entity?

And since I don't see any advantage in especially encouraging people to have themselves uploaded, why not keep things simple?

What is the advantage to having the right to free speech if that right is used to say things you don't like?

What right does the rest of society have to prevent people from uploading themselves if that's what they really want? Or even just throwing bureaucratic obstacles into their way?

Especially considering that there are some problems like for example in the USA where SAIs who emulate human beings are treated as citizens but SAIs who do not or do not do it well enough, are treated as mere animals. Isn't that kind of inconsistent ruling downright an invitation of critizism?

Of course it is - but then the lack of rights of SAIs in the USA has been an invitation to criticism right from the start.

And when more and more rich and influential people are being replaced by ghosts, isn't it to be expexted that the "the machines are taking over" meme spreads in the general populace? Couldn't that lead to social instability?

You mean, when compared to the proliferation of SAIs, who were never human in the first place, or parahumans, who have less and less in common with their human roots?

Sure, it's an issue - but only one issue among many...

Finally, as you said yourself, the hassles that are presently still avoided because of destructive ghost creation begin once somebody invents nondestructive uploading. When the first person plays "I start a sentence, you finish it" with its newly created mind emulation, everybody would see without any doubt that human and ghost are not the same being just because they think alike. And even the rich and influential would then want that even the first ghost is regarded as a mere safety copy without any rights or, if it should acquire a cybershell illegally, an unwanted xox that had better be destroyed.

The solution to this is actually quite simple, now that someone else here has pointed it out:

Non-destructive uploading will be legal, but activating that upload will be treated the same as xoxing.

So I see some disadvantages, but considering how dangerous uploading is and the fact that there are less dangerous alternatives to prolong ones life indefinitly by biotechnical means, why encourage it by artificially proposing an transferred identity?

Because it should not be the business of society to tell its members what to do, as long as they don't harm others in the process?

[Khoontshdroos]

Originally Posted by malek77

Well - here's my base Ontological assumption.

MEMETIC AND COGNITIVE HAZARD WARNING.
May be offensive to people with a pre-existing concept of soul. Or anyone who believes in matter. Or reality.

Matter does not exist, energy does not exist, we know only that interaction exists.
Consider, when we 'see' something, it's a photon being released from an energetic atom, travelling (at what appears to itself to be infinite speed) from light source to object to my eye. In my eye it sparks off another energetic reaction, which has a cascade effect in concert with the results from millions of other photon strikes. All these little interactions build up to generate an internal symbol of the 'Object', which is manipulated in a wetware application called 'Conscious Mind' (j/k, but you get the analogy) and then 'Personality' is run on it to decide what to do with the symbol.

Well, this is a 100% materialistic description of this phenomenon. Very similar of Epicures point of view, at least in the way of explanation. Then what?

Originally Posted by malek77

Everything we see or do works something like that, and at no point do we ever come in contact with the real sub strata of reality that makes it work.

What about is this? If you understand “real sub strata of reality” as something that is object to scientifical study, I don’t understand what you would name “come in contact with”??? If you think: The Ultimate Understanding of Reality, ok. No way to ever get it.

Originally Posted by malek77

So all that is, and is perceived, and acted on, only has a known existence as interaction. That's all we know. 'Gold' is a name for a set of interactions to do with experiences of weight and colour etc. We don't know if there is 'real' Gold under the interaction.

Then what would real gold be, since all we know as gold is the gold we know. Or do you mean something like the noumenon/phenomenon opposition(Kant)??? If I understand, you say: everything we can record is something that we can record; there is no way to record it if it is unrecordable. Or didn’t I copy it??? –Or- do you mean: all we can get is what we can touch, that’s the observer and the observable are not separable in the observation? (Then, yeah, Of course!). Or do you just mean that all we know is concepts that we have to synthetize (then, Kant again)?

Originally Posted by malek77

So what's reality? What 'runs' all these elaborate interactions?

Well lots of people said something about that. Not that many have agreed each others, despite the fact that lots of them had an “s” in their name. Or more, - like KhoontShdrooS. :)

Originally Posted by malek77

Take one standard brain. It takes input, processes, outputs. It's a very complex bulge in the totality of the interaction-processing going on the Universe. (our peasant would take a huge amount of processor power, probably more than his world does, to simulate)
This 'bulge', 'conscious cloud', 'fruit of the jizaiten tree' (Shirow reference, see GitS comic), is a pattern of interaction. It may have an analogous apparently physical object explaining its operation (the Grey Matter and synapses of a brain), but that itself is no more than perceived interactions.
What if you didn't bother with that analogy or explanation, and just had the raw pattern? Isn't that a Soul? The total mind of the being, the pattern by which it manipulates symbols of what it perceives and generates decisions?

Again, what are you talking about? About those “golden” perceived interactions; that’s: a brain in activity, or the raw pattern of a brain in activity, and not about an unknown “being” behind, whatever you call it (“soul”, “mind”, “homunculus”, “Real Thing Behind The Analogous Apparently Physical Object (RTBTAAPO)”, “ultimate human understanding of human understanding of anything including human understanding of anything”, …), I guess… If not, if you really thinks RTBTAAPO or the like, then you speak of something you can conceive, but have no access to. If the total mind needs to use undiscovered Khoontshdroos Ray to proceed, implicating undetected Khoontshdroos field interacting with the minds possibilities, then you will not be able to take them in account, isn't? ...

Originally Posted by malek77

...if you Upload a brain, the file isn't just a file. It is A SOUL. Not just a copy of a soul, but a real soul, and even if you change it massively it remains a soul, but of a different being. It can be a soul because a soul is not a physical thing but a pattern of interaction, and you can record that. It also happens to be more real than the hardware you're 'saving' it on.

…Therefore, you can’t copy something you do not know. Your scanner will scan only things it had been planned to scan. If you know patterns of interaction in the form of galaxies of neurons in activity, it is the only thing you can pretend to copy. Then why do you call it a soul (or an Angel, a Daimon, the RTBTAAPO, or whatever the like)??? Anyhow, no way to use this as a bias to assimilate the Original Brain and his Emulated Copy. Scientifically explain that AFAWK 2 things are similar is a matter, metaphysically interpret them as identical, is a completely distinct matter. And if you get rid of the metaphysic by the door, be sure it will re-enter by the more unexpected window. (Like undeads in a bad horror movie. Metaphysic not dead. Boooo.)

Originally Posted by malek77

Maybe, like that peasant, we're seeing that what we see, is not what is. :)

Yup. Maybe. :P

[sn0wball]

Originally Posted by Kitsune

Since, as you put it so aptly, the fomer is a meatbag with bloodtype, DNA and fingerprints whereas the ghost is a program which has nothing of the kind. And now to say "they are the same" is quite something.

The question of identity is an important topic in THS. But it seems doubtful that it can still be solved by genetics. There is hardly a thing you cannot change about your body. Like new bloodtype, fingerprints etc - so it might be argued that identity in practice in nothing but a legal fiction anyway.

Originally Posted by Kitsune

Where is the problem to simply say that there is a human that dies and a new being that is born? I mean, that is a more accurate description of what happens, isn't it? And since I don't see any advantage in especially encouraging people to have themselves uploaded, why not keep things simple?

It is obvious that a lot of parties have a strong interest in having a strong legal connection between the Ghost and the body - the person in question, his family, his business partners ... on the other hand, nobody has any interest in creating a new born ghost.

At first glance I also thought that it creates many legal problems if it stays the same person. But after all of the discussion I don´t see it that way. If there is a proper procedure for recognizing the new ghost as the old person, then there are probably no problems at all. Also, it is usually not the function of law to keep things simple.