If it is possible, is it ethical to create an artificial consciousness?
Only if it is constitutionally incapable of feeling negative emotions. Or maybe if it has a high positive/negative emotion balance.
No.
>>1144952
>actual baby
Product of God
>AI
Not real
>>1144962
>>God
>>Real
lol
>>1144974
*tips fedora*
poor bait
>>1144952
>What distinguishes an AI that mimics a baby and an actual baby?
It would kill an actual baby if you connected it to the mains to charge it.
>>1144974
you atheists already got BTFO in the other thread
you want to be BTFO here too?
>>1144987
*snorts with laughter at ridiculous claim*
>>1144987
>>Crapfloods a thread with cretinist horseshit
>>thinks that counts as a BTFO
lol
>>1144983
ok ok, but lets drop any practicalities. Lets say the synths are biological machines, or whatever excuse you would like - when it comes down to it, how do you distinguish from Turing Test AI and regular consciousness?
You can't. Except there is probably more intelligence in the hands for the AI.
>>1144980
It's hardly baiting to lol at somebody just taking the existence of a deity or group of deities for granted.
>>1144952
No.
The only excuse is that we are literally hardwired to want to create babies.
>>1145004
You are 100% correct.
The OP question is kinda loaded anyway. Better to say - will we end up making AI's as a species and can these crazy terminator making murderers be stopped?
>>1144922
>>1144875
>is it ethical to create an artificial consciousness
Depends on what ethical system you follow. It's been notoriously hard to find one we can all agree on.
>>1145016
good angle, and he framed it as a supposition too.
bad way to ask a philosophical question OP.
>>1145025
It could be worse. There's a thread a few pages down with an acolyte of Sam Harris who spent 100 posts arguing for utilitarianism, without admitting that it rests on a number of unproven assumptions.
>>1144875
Define consciousness
