Any actual implementation would have to have some way of deciding what qualifies as human and what was a synthetic intelligence.
Completely bypassing the issue of what it takes to be a human obscures the difficulty of saying what a human is.
Since humans are awarded all rights while machines are given none, this creates an immense pressure for the machines to do whatever it takes to become a human—since this would gives them rights, power—and thus improved ability to attain their goals.
A likely result would be impersonation of humans and corruption and influence of them, with the aim of making what “humans” collectively wish for more attainable.
IMO, there is no clear dividing line between a human and a superintelligence—rather you could gradually change one into the other by a sequence of small changes. Attempting to create such a division by using a definition would lead to an “us” and “them” situation. Humanity itself would be divided—with some wanting the new bodies and minds for themselves—but being constrained by the whole “slavery” issue.
The idea of wiring a detailed definition of what it takes to be a human into a superintelligent machine strikes me as being misguided hubris. As though humans were the pinnacle of evolution.
It is more as though we are just starting to lift our heads out of the river of slime in which we are embedded. The new bodies and brains are visible floating above us, currently out of reach. Some people are saying that the river of slime is good, and that we should do our best to preserve it.
Screw that. The river of slime is something we should get out of as soon as possible—before asteroid smashes into us, and obliterates our seed for all eternity. The slime is not something to be revered—it is what is holding us back.
Any actual implementation would have to have some way of deciding what qualifies as human and what was a synthetic intelligence.
Completely bypassing the issue of what it takes to be a human obscures the difficulty of saying what a human is.
Since humans are awarded all rights while machines are given none, this creates an immense pressure for the machines to do whatever it takes to become a human—since this would gives them rights, power—and thus improved ability to attain their goals.
A likely result would be impersonation of humans and corruption and influence of them, with the aim of making what “humans” collectively wish for more attainable.
IMO, there is no clear dividing line between a human and a superintelligence—rather you could gradually change one into the other by a sequence of small changes. Attempting to create such a division by using a definition would lead to an “us” and “them” situation. Humanity itself would be divided—with some wanting the new bodies and minds for themselves—but being constrained by the whole “slavery” issue.
The idea of wiring a detailed definition of what it takes to be a human into a superintelligent machine strikes me as being misguided hubris. As though humans were the pinnacle of evolution.
It is more as though we are just starting to lift our heads out of the river of slime in which we are embedded. The new bodies and brains are visible floating above us, currently out of reach. Some people are saying that the river of slime is good, and that we should do our best to preserve it.
Screw that. The river of slime is something we should get out of as soon as possible—before asteroid smashes into us, and obliterates our seed for all eternity. The slime is not something to be revered—it is what is holding us back.