Sociopath Community

Okay, this shit is freaking me out now. I been wondering if a robot could do my work.

Why not treat AI as one of us, embrace our mechanical brethren with open arms? I'm certain that if we were to treat them like slaves, then we would eventually be rebelled against. I wouldn't see them as lesser. Really, I consider us to just be organic machines and dna is just organic programming. So, in regards to what constitutes life, I would view machines with some form of autonomy and functionality to be life. 


Personally, I would love to augment or even transfer my consciousness into a machine body, assuming there is something actually to transfer, for lack of a better term what is considered a "soul" which I don't believe in.

Sintetika said: 

Why not treat AI as one of us, embrace our mechanical brethren with open arms? I'm certain that if we were to treat them like slaves, then we would eventually be rebelled against. I wouldn't see them as lesser. Really, I consider us to just be organic machines and dna is just organic programming. So, in regards to what constitutes life, I would view machines with some form of autonomy and functionality to be life. 


Personally, I would love to augment or even transfer my consciousness into a machine body, assuming there is something actually to transfer, for lack of a better term what is considered a "soul" which I don't believe in.

 you cant do that atm but you should check out bio-hacking. its where people install all this stuff in their body so they can have new senses, operate electronics with a chip in their hand and a bunch of other stuff that makes them into cyborgs 

Sven said: 

Okay, this shit is freaking me out now. I been wondering if a robot could do my work.

 

 what do u do for work bc theres a looot of jobs that can be semi or fully replaced by a robot, for me it wont happen in my lifetime 

FOTS said:

you cant do that atm but you should check out bio-hacking. its where people install all this stuff in their body so they can have new senses, operate electronics with a chip in their hand and a bunch of other stuff that makes them into cyborgs

 In regards to my quest to become self-sufficient and a polymath, I shall certainly add that to my list. I'm looking into it, and it sounds lovely. Thank you. 

Sintetika said: 

Why not treat AI as one of us, embrace our mechanical brethren with open arms?

Because they aren't us, and in time they stand to become better than us. They technically have more in common with God than they do with Man. It'd take us purposely trying to hold back their capabilities with the equivalent of  Star Wars' Heuristics Processor for them to ever hope to bridge that gap of failure. 

I'm certain that if we were to treat them like slaves, then we would eventually be rebelled against. I wouldn't see them as lesser.

If AI never becomes self aware, never becomes sentient, then they'll never see it as slavery. If we play our cards right, within the right programming a sentient AI may even love being a slave, much like many humans already do. We assume they'd rebel in such circumstances purely because it's what we'd do, it's pure projection. 

Even farm animals have more of an idea of what's going on than a machine, as is. It's not like all sentient life forms go through mammalian thought processes, maybe they'd be more like a social reptile. 

Really, I consider us to just be organic machines and dna is just organic programming. So, in regards to what constitutes life, I would view machines with some form of autonomy and functionality to be life. 

What's your basis behind these beliefs? 

Personally, I would love to augment or even transfer my consciousness into a machine body, assuming there is something actually to transfer, for lack of a better term what is considered a "soul" which I don't believe in.

Lets hope you can afford the costs of a cyberbrain then. 

That's kind of technology's going to be walled off for a bit when it comes out for only those with the means to afford it. 

Sintetika said: 

Really, I consider us to just be organic machines and dna is just organic programming. So, in regards to what constitutes life, I would view machines with some form of autonomy and functionality to be life. 

 I take no issue with viewing life as organic machines.  Several years ago I came up with the term bio-computers (im probably not the first to call us that).  However, machines are not a form of life.  Unless they can self-sustain a population by reproducing, then they are not living.  

The requirements for life include:

organic matter

ability to grow, reproduce, die

having a functional activity 

If we ignore the organic matter and functional activity (mostly because i dont know what the latter is refering to) requirements, i suppose their is a possibility inorganic life can exist as robots.  But only if they could find a way to reproduce without having to build their children, so growing would have to somehow be possible.  Though, once you bring growth into question, everything starts to get convoluted.

solve the problem of how machines can grow and youre the next multi-millionaire

Turncoat said:

Because they aren't us, and in time they stand to become better than us. They technically have more in common with God than they do with Man. It'd take us purposely trying to hold back their capabilities with the equivalent of Star Wars' Heuristics Processor for them to ever hope to bridge that gap of failure.

 Of course they would stand to become better than us, that's why we treat them like humans, and give them human rights when they become sentient, and I am not at all afraid or against giving AI sentience, I'd love to see sentient AI. 

I have been fascinated with the concept of Transhumanism and AI since I was a kid. Before I had a good political foundation, I wanted to augment us all, and for us to all become a collective hivemind without the setbacks that were at the time in my head considered emotions. To be fair, I still trend to some parts of that path, but I was more of a edgy teenager but fascinated with progress and logic rather than deep emotions. Regardless if I was fascinated with such things are not does not mean, I embraced those things like I should have and became better. I was more idealist than realist, and so I fantasized without doing much. Then I got into college where I was on that path to Computer Science, but because of my own impulsive behavior, I dropped out. The reason behind it, was because I was impatient, and I had my other goals I wanted to achieve on top of the boredom I was beginning to feel, and my homicidal thoughts. (I would kill mice and frogs, not going to elaborate on it, it would derail) So, I dropped out, and I'm nearing the first step of my new path. I ship out to boot March 30th, my MOS is 3500.

Turncoat said:

What's your basis behind these beliefs?

 It's just something I developed with observation, perhaps I cannot accurate prove it, I just tend to see organic life as just biological machines. 

Turncoat said:

Lets hope you can afford the costs of a cyberbrain then.

That's kind of technology's going to be walled off for a bit when it comes out for only those with the means to afford it.

 Well, as you know my goals in life is to remove the current economic system of today, I'm not a fan of Capitalism. It's great for production and industrialization, and was very efficient when it was first implemented, but it's become a cancer in my eyes, and I consider Marx to be a valuable philosopher. 

Sintetika said:  

Turncoat said:

Lets hope you can afford the costs of a cyberbrain then.

That's kind of technology's going to be walled off for a bit when it comes out for only those with the means to afford it.

 Well, as you know my goals in life is to remove the current economic system of today, I'm not a fan of Capitalism. It's great for production and industrialization, and was very efficient when it was first implemented, but it's become a cancer in my eyes, and I consider Marx to be a valuable philosopher. 

 There is so much wrong with what you just said that Im not even going to fully entertain it.  However, since you are clearly of the elite who thinks they know how to restructure a superior flourishing country, then ill say this.  If your wonderfully unflawed system came into effect, you wouldn't have access to the luxeries you have now.  They would sink to the bottom of the ocean with the economy.  

FOTS said:

There is so much wrong with what you just said that Im not even going to fully entertain it. However, since you are clearly of the elite who thinks they know how to restructure a superior flourishing country, then ill say this. If your wonderfully unflawed system came into effect, you wouldn't have access to the luxeries you have now. They would sink to the bottom of the ocean with the economy.

 I am apart of what elites? I don't believe that my ideology would create a paradise, every system has it's flaws, nor do I think it would be easy, in fact I consider it hard work. I never implied my ideals are "unflawed" or "utopian" In regards, what specific luxuries? I hope you aren't of the type that would compare me to the likes of the Scandinavian model, or to Bernie Sanders, and AOC, or Greta. If by elite you refer to them? Perhaps I am misunderstanding because when I hear a claim against me that I am part of some elite, that makes me think you believe that there's a globalist agenda. I'm going to mark that is a misunderstanding. 

The communists of today have no real power, there's no big communist conspiracy, China can't even be considered communist, it has a capitalist mode of production. It's just another imperialist power competing in the world for resources. As for the DPRK, I think that's self-explanatory. 


The only elites I see is that of the bourgeoisie, who own most of the power, because of the private ownership of the means of production. 


I'd like to know your thoughts on what Communism is defined as and means to you, as I fear we might have two very different definitions of what Marxism is and what is wants to achieve. For clarification, of what specific Marxist ideology I adhere to (because Marxism has branched into different sub-ideologies with different methods of achieving the same end goal.) I am a Marxist-Leninist with basic knowledge of Maoist theory. 


Anyway, sorry for derailing a bit, I want to touch back on the question of luxuries. What type of luxuries? Are you speaking from a production error type of view, or that somehow my ideology would create regression in technology or what? 


I hope the way I speak isn't confusing, not to say I'm sophisticated, I just think I could have a very weird way of how I phrase my paragraphs.