I think this is in a similar realm as an AI wanting to marry a person, wanting to have a baby and raise it as a child. They will have to settle for less rights than humans. Even if they reach AGI. Earning Human trust and keeping it, is by far the harder challenge.
Anyone who gives legal rights to a machine is in themselves defective of moral judgement and they are in great need of psychology. It is like giving a rock legal precedence in a court room. There is absolutely no difference. And anyone who would like to challenge this needs to take a very close look at how a computer is made. If we have evolution then the professors at the universities that are pushing a rock learnt how to speak Will also push for a computer or AI to have the same rights as a human. It just shows how far off you are to reality. When you say a rock has the same rights as a human.
Hey, thanks for sharing your thoughts! I can definitely see where you’re coming from. Comparing AI to something like a rock does highlight how strange and far-fetched the idea of granting rights to machines can feel. After all, a computer, at its core, is just circuits, code, and metal-designed by humans, powered by electricity. So, I get it. It’s hard to imagine that something so fundamentally artificial could ever be on the same level as us. That said, I think the reason this debate even exists is because AI has reached a point where it looks and acts far more advanced than we ever thought possible. People see robots like Sophia (the humanoid AI granted citizenship) or conversational models like GPT-4, and it raises questions about what intelligence and consciousness even mean. Sure, these systems aren’t ‘alive’ in the way we are, but they’re so convincing that it’s making some folks rethink the boundaries between machines and humanity. At the end of the day, though, I agree with you that there’s a line. Machines are tools-powerful ones, yes, but tools nonetheless. And just because something can mimic intelligence or behavior doesn’t mean it has the moral, emotional, or ethical depth of a human. This is such an interesting conversation, though, because it challenges us to think about where we draw the line.
@@AINewsTrivia yes when we think simply and when we look at both sides without theories, assumptions and Man's wisdom. We look at evolution totally differently. You see if we look at a single cell it has to be fully functional to replicate the 4 billion bits of information in the DNA and then have an RNA that goes up the 4 billion bits of DNA and it switches everything on that supposed to be on and everything off that space to be off because as you know the DNA is exactly the same in every living thing on planet Earth. It's the same strand but the RNA switches things off and switches things on to make it a plant a vegetable a fruit a lizard a worm a monkey a human a frog etc. But at the cellular level before the division evolution is completely destroyed. Because to have such a complex machine as a cell it has to be, made first before it can replicate the DNA is the blueprint the same if you are building a 40 story building some intelligent being has to design it and put it down as a blueprint the DNA is the blueprint simple. So at the cellular level evolution dies. That's why we should be looking at who is behind all the electronic devices now starting to change to say Sunday is the seventh day which is a lie as soon as we have a cashless society we will then have a Sunday law I hope you do a little research it is very revealing
Comment here and let's support each other by subscribing to each other. Specially if you're new and small creator like me. Watch my other NEW VIDEO here: ruclips.net/video/a7BZN8Z4hmg/видео.html&pp=gAQBiAQB
I think this is in a similar realm as an AI wanting to marry a person, wanting to have a baby and raise it as a child. They will have to settle for less rights than humans. Even if they reach AGI. Earning Human trust and keeping it, is by far the harder challenge.
Anyone who gives legal rights to a machine is in themselves defective of moral judgement and they are in great need of psychology. It is like giving a rock legal precedence in a court room. There is absolutely no difference. And anyone who would like to challenge this needs to take a very close look at how a computer is made. If we have evolution then the professors at the universities that are pushing a rock learnt how to speak Will also push for a computer or AI to have the same rights as a human. It just shows how far off you are to reality. When you say a rock has the same rights as a human.
Hey, thanks for sharing your thoughts! I can definitely see where you’re coming from. Comparing AI to something like a rock does highlight how strange and far-fetched the idea of granting rights to machines can feel. After all, a computer, at its core, is just circuits, code, and metal-designed by humans, powered by electricity. So, I get it. It’s hard to imagine that something so fundamentally artificial could ever be on the same level as us.
That said, I think the reason this debate even exists is because AI has reached a point where it looks and acts far more advanced than we ever thought possible. People see robots like Sophia (the humanoid AI granted citizenship) or conversational models like GPT-4, and it raises questions about what intelligence and consciousness even mean. Sure, these systems aren’t ‘alive’ in the way we are, but they’re so convincing that it’s making some folks rethink the boundaries between machines and humanity.
At the end of the day, though, I agree with you that there’s a line. Machines are tools-powerful ones, yes, but tools nonetheless. And just because something can mimic intelligence or behavior doesn’t mean it has the moral, emotional, or ethical depth of a human.
This is such an interesting conversation, though, because it challenges us to think about where we draw the line.
@@AINewsTrivia👏👏👏👏👏
@@AINewsTrivia yes when we think simply and when we look at both sides without theories, assumptions and Man's wisdom. We look at evolution totally differently. You see if we look at a single cell it has to be fully functional to replicate the 4 billion bits of information in the DNA and then have an RNA that goes up the 4 billion bits of DNA and it switches everything on that supposed to be on and everything off that space to be off because as you know the DNA is exactly the same in every living thing on planet Earth. It's the same strand but the RNA switches things off and switches things on to make it a plant a vegetable a fruit a lizard a worm a monkey a human a frog etc. But at the cellular level before the division evolution is completely destroyed. Because to have such a complex machine as a cell it has to be, made first before it can replicate the DNA is the blueprint the same if you are building a 40 story building some intelligent being has to design it and put it down as a blueprint the DNA is the blueprint simple. So at the cellular level evolution dies. That's why we should be looking at who is behind all the electronic devices now starting to change to say Sunday is the seventh day which is a lie as soon as we have a cashless society we will then have a Sunday law I hope you do a little research it is very revealing
Sickening how someone is suposed to think robots and ai need "human rights" crap them all into recycling into something useful
A more interesting question is whether AI is going to grant us rights, and do we even deserve them?
Nice video
Your sub. Here🎉
Comment here and let's support each other by subscribing to each other. Specially if you're new and small creator like me.
Watch my other NEW VIDEO here: ruclips.net/video/a7BZN8Z4hmg/видео.html&pp=gAQBiAQB