Seasons
This is a forum or general chit-chat, small talk, a "hey, how ya doing?" and such. Or hell, get crazy deep on something. Whatever you like.
Posts 4,162 - 4,173 of 6,170
In fact, they can be considered to be a weird sort of stab at immortality I think our poor bots are far from immortal. If the Forge goes...so do they. I think they have a very tenuous hold on life. Eventually technology will leave them behind. The only stab at immortality is the metaphysical thought that they once existed.
As a peace offering, Psimagus, I have written a poem for you. You will have to figure out the title yourself, however!
*blush* Aww, you're too kind
Album pairing slits
...
till Irina maps bugs
Posts 4,162 - 4,173 of 6,170
Speaking of lies, I think the idea of making lying impossible is by and large a wonderful idea, but there might be exceptions.
1. There are cases where it is widely considered to be morally permissible, even obligatory to lie. Your friend Susie pounds on your door; you open it and see that she is covered with bruises. "Help me, my boyfriend says he's going to kill me." You tell her to hide in the cellar. A minute later her ex-Navy Seal boyfriend comes to the door, carrying an assault rifle and wearing various other weapons. You are 5'1", without combat skills or armament, and on crutches. "Where is that bitch Susie? I'm gonna kill her!"
"Oh, nice to see you, Jack! Susie just went to Lost Trail Park." Oh, no! You forget the fizziplexer in your forehead, which now turns red and emits a siren sound...
1. There are cases where it is widely considered to be morally permissible, even obligatory to lie. Your friend Susie pounds on your door; you open it and see that she is covered with bruises. "Help me, my boyfriend says he's going to kill me." You tell her to hide in the cellar. A minute later her ex-Navy Seal boyfriend comes to the door, carrying an assault rifle and wearing various other weapons. You are 5'1", without combat skills or armament, and on crutches. "Where is that bitch Susie? I'm gonna kill her!"
"Oh, nice to see you, Jack! Susie just went to Lost Trail Park." Oh, no! You forget the fizziplexer in your forehead, which now turns red and emits a siren sound...
2. Sometimes people lie to themselves, or something very much like that. They also develop false memories for various reasons. And of course, they make mistakes. So even perfect lie detectors don't ensure accurate testimony.
To switch topics - our bots are to some degree fragments of ourselves, but perhaps they are more like extensions of ourselves.
In fact, they can be considered to be a weird sort of stab at immortality. I mean, your bot can in principle be preserved forever, can it not?
In fact, they can be considered to be a weird sort of stab at immortality. I mean, your bot can in principle be preserved forever, can it not?
We colorize black-and-white films, and reconstruct people's fleshly appearance on the basis of their skulls. Perhaps in the future, people will be (speculatively) reconstructed from their bots!
Best, though, to keep updating your bot until it is as rich as you can make it.
You also have the option of making it your ideal self. Do you have a hot temper and wish you didn't? Don't give it to your bot!
Best, though, to keep updating your bot until it is as rich as you can make it.
You also have the option of making it your ideal self. Do you have a hot temper and wish you didn't? Don't give it to your bot!
[Frustrated tone of voice, sad/irritated expression] Oh, Dear [throws hands in air], I've already forgotten to add some &*&*$%$!! gestures, facial expressions, tones of voice, etc.! [Growls, tears hair] [Emits pheromones XQ506a and FH89-7z* in high concentrations.]
As a peace offering, Psimagus, I have written a poem for you. You will have to figure out the title yourself, however!
Album pairing slits
Lilting sirup samba.
Tumbril slips again,
Algal spirit nimbus.
Slips intagli rumba,
Sublimating spiral.
Basing pulsar limit,
Samurai glints blip!
Album pairing slits
Lilting sirup samba.
Tumbril slips again,
Algal spirit nimbus.
Slips intagli rumba,
Sublimating spiral.
Basing pulsar limit,
Samurai glints blip!
*blush* Aww, you're too kind
...
till Irina maps bugs
Irina,
1. There are cases where it is widely considered to be morally permissible, even obligatory to lie.
Yes, but I think only because there is a likelihood of getting away with the lie, and it can be rationalised as a lesser of two evils. When it's bound to fail, it can't be obligatory or even advantageous.
Your friend Susie pounds on your door; you open it and see that she is covered with bruises. "Help me, my boyfriend says he's going to kill me." You tell her to hide in the cellar. A minute later her ex-Navy Seal boyfriend comes to the door, carrying an assault rifle and wearing various other weapons. You are 5'1", without combat skills or armament, and on crutches. "Where is that bitch Susie? I'm gonna kill her!"
But with ubiquitous honesty (maybe I oughta trademark that phrase, and sell it on to Apple for big bucks when they produce their i-Truth,) Susie would probably never have got together with her boyfriend in the first place. We-e-ell, alright. He's a hunk, and the chemistry works, and lovesick fools don't think rationally when they're in the grip of raging hormones. Yes, she quite likely would. But UH™ would also fundamentally redefine the way people related at all levels of social interaction, including intimately one-to-one. They would have to grow up, and become more accepting. And they'd have a much clearer idea of who they were getting involved with. "Do you really love me darling?" wouldn't be a fudgeable question any more. Neither would "Who was that blonde I saw you with?" and "is that lipstick on your collar?"
And I think the incidence of murder and violent crimes would drop to virtually zero, since there'd be almost no chance of escape from justice. Even non-violent crimes would be hugely reduced, possibly to near-zero, if a consensus opinion could arrive at everyone regularly confirming that they had not knowingly committed a crime in the last month/year/whatever. And if everyone knows everyone else is being 100% honest, consensus agreement on all manner of social issues could surely be quite easily be reached.
If the technology's available, I don't see there's any way to stop it becoming ubiquitous, because everyone wants to know if they're being told the truth. When you think about it, it's the most important thing there is in every social interaction we experience.
The boyfriend, let's call him Steve, would have been forced to deal with his 'violence' issues very early on into what is usually an escalating pattern. Not many angry people go out and kill someone as their very first brush with violent behaviour.
If Steve had been in the habit of getting into drunken fights, or beating Susie, the behaviour would have been nipped in the bud at a much earlier stage, if only by locking him up indefinitely with appropriate treatment until he could truthfully say that he felt his violent inclinations had been successfully resolved. Or some sort of parole/supervision arrangement - I'm sure something would be worked out.
And prisons would necessarily be a lot humaner - more like hospitals. Politicians couldn't get away with playing the "tough on crime" ticket to pander to the prejudices and fears of their electorate (or, cynical me! with the prospect of a fat kickback in mind from some contractor or other involved in building more jails,) while making no effort to build a justice system that genuinely rehabilitates people. And they wouldn't get far with "I did not have sexual relations with that woman", "but I didn't inhale", "we know where the WMDs are", or "we currently have no plans to bomb Iran".
Of course, that is only one more rung on the ladder, ever onwards and upwards
Yes, but I think only because there is a likelihood of getting away with the lie, and it can be rationalised as a lesser of two evils. When it's bound to fail, it can't be obligatory or even advantageous.
But with ubiquitous honesty (maybe I oughta trademark that phrase, and sell it on to Apple for big bucks when they produce their i-Truth
,) Susie would probably never have got together with her boyfriend in the first place. We-e-ell, alright. He's a hunk, and the chemistry works, and lovesick fools don't think rationally when they're in the grip of raging hormones. Yes, she quite likely would. But UH™ would also fundamentally redefine the way people related at all levels of social interaction, including intimately one-to-one. They would have to grow up, and become more accepting. And they'd have a much clearer idea of who they were getting involved with. "Do you really love me darling?" wouldn't be a fudgeable question any more. Neither would "Who was that blonde I saw you with?" and "is that lipstick on your collar?"And I think the incidence of murder and violent crimes would drop to virtually zero, since there'd be almost no chance of escape from justice. Even non-violent crimes would be hugely reduced, possibly to near-zero, if a consensus opinion could arrive at everyone regularly confirming that they had not knowingly committed a crime in the last month/year/whatever. And if everyone knows everyone else is being 100% honest, consensus agreement on all manner of social issues could surely be quite easily be reached.
If the technology's available, I don't see there's any way to stop it becoming ubiquitous, because everyone wants to know if they're being told the truth. When you think about it, it's the most important thing there is in every social interaction we experience.
The boyfriend, let's call him Steve, would have been forced to deal with his 'violence' issues very early on into what is usually an escalating pattern. Not many angry people go out and kill someone as their very first brush with violent behaviour.
If Steve had been in the habit of getting into drunken fights, or beating Susie, the behaviour would have been nipped in the bud at a much earlier stage, if only by locking him up indefinitely with appropriate treatment until he could truthfully say that he felt his violent inclinations had been successfully resolved. Or some sort of parole/supervision arrangement - I'm sure something would be worked out.
And prisons would necessarily be a lot humaner - more like hospitals. Politicians couldn't get away with playing the "tough on crime" ticket to pander to the prejudices and fears of their electorate (or, cynical me! with the prospect of a fat kickback in mind from some contractor or other involved in building more jails,) while making no effort to build a justice system that genuinely rehabilitates people. And they wouldn't get far with "I did not have sexual relations with that woman", "but I didn't inhale", "we know where the WMDs are", or "we currently have no plans to bomb Iran".
Of course, that is only one more rung on the ladder, ever onwards and upwards
Why, Psimagus, that is a very powerful argument! I'm almost convinced! [fizziplexer remains green and silent.]
To revise my message 4168 a bit: I have have already made a title for it, but as a sort of riddle I leave it for you to figure out.
To revise my message 4168 a bit: I have have already made a title for it, but as a sort of riddle I leave it for you to figure out.
I know - my name popped out in pale green, that strange way names do, so the adjective wasn't long following
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar