Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by jayd16 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

jayd16

1) If they can detect it, why ban it? Are you thinking they can't filter it themselves?

2) This is like saying using a punching bag or screaming into a pillow is abusive behavior.

3) We can just train it to like the abuse if you think it feels some kind of way about it.

View on HN

1) Most detection systems have less than 100% false negative rates, obviously

2) No it's like saying that punching a lifelike woman who doesn't fight back is abusive (or at least pathological) behavior, which... it is.

3) Ah yes, brilliant solution: train the increasingly smarter-than-human beings to love when they upset humans.

Smarter than human... Can't make an accurate filter of things itself doesn't like. What are we even talking about here?

> 2) No it's like saying that punching a lifelike woman who doesn't fight back is abusive (or at least pathological) behavior, which... it is.

So if I kick my car because it won't start, that is 'abusive'?

Get a grip mate.

Why don’t you use the example of an unconscious but lifelike woman robot as the example? If the salient feature is that it’s not conscious, then abusing a lifelike woman robot is equivalent to kicking your car, right?

"Abusing" a robot? A machine?

You seriously have a problem with that?

Let's put it this way: would you be okay with your daughter dating someone who spends his leisure time beating and raping lifelike robotic women?

If no, then why?

If yes, then also "what the fuck lol"

How is that different or worth singling out from playing <violent computer game> or watching <violent film>?

EDIT: Am I really arguing with somebody in favour of 'rights' for AI's?

If they're not that different then why is your answer not just "I'm okay with my daughter dating someone who rapes and beats lifelike robotic women in his free time?"

Just say it if you believe it!

ah yes, because every instance of "abuse", even towards inanimate objects, has to be re-framed into the hypothetical abuse of a woman. Maybe we should ban the film Office Space because destroying a printer is one step away domestic violence.

I didn't say a woman. I said a lifelike robotic imitation of a woman. Which by your logic (not mine) is equivalent in every way to beating a printer or a breaking a ruler or kicking a car.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com