It's also from an era where you used one piece of software doing routine tasks that rarely changed.
Imagine learning all the keyboard shortcuts for every website you use nowadays.
For example I worked at a video store long ago that had some dos program to manage everything, I didn't own a computer and I didn't use any other software. It was still often a slow turd, and it wasn't networked with the 2 other local stores, so if I wanted to know if a customer had an account there, or if they had some stock there, I had to call.
> [2] To preempt the inevitable petty drive-by pedant, I define "human" as any animal with these two properties, so according to this view, an intelligent alien from another planet would also be human, despite occupying a place in a separate phylogenetic tree or whatever.
Your alien might have some 3rd property that you do not, and thus may farm you.
A future AI that can produce and consume the sum total of all recorded human knowledge within the amount of time that you have a single thought will likely have many emergent properties that you do not, and thus may farm you as well.
> Indeed, it usually rests on sentiment or convention rather than a sound and rationally grounded objective ethics.
Your whole argument rests on sentiment and convention, and would have been summarily rejected by the slave owner based on his own.
> Your alien might have some 3rd property that you do not, and thus may farm you.
It is irrelevant, because reason and free will are sufficient to guarantee rights. Whether someone respects them is a separate question.
Also, it is a vacuous posit. You can't approach these properties superficially. Intellect and free will are not some arbitrary, contentless properties in some bag of properties of equally arbitrary status. They determine essentially and intrinsically what it means to be human. They are constitutive of humanity. It means something to have an intellect and free will, and they have consequences for things like body plan. You're approach is basically that of a child playing a game thinking he can just mix and match properties arbitrarily in a bucket without any consideration given to cohesion or causal relations. This is perhaps the effect of teleological blindness, which renders the universe unintelligible and ultimately undermines the viability of the entire discussion.
> A future AI that can produce and consume the sum total of all recorded human knowledge within the amount of time that you have a single thought will likely have many emergent properties that you do not, and thus may farm you as well.
First, AI is not intelligent and doesn't possess agency, as I have already explained elsewhere. To attribute these to AI is pure science fiction and fantasy rooted in a failure to grasp what computation is and what it lacks in relation to intellect. Second, even if we assume what you've written, it's not clear what your point is. What you seem to be describing is an evil being. I mean, I can farm people today, right? But I have no right to do so. I would be committing an immoral act.
> Your whole argument rests on sentiment and convention, and would have been summarily rejected by the slave owner based on his own.
Ha! No, it is absolutely not. It is rooted in natural law theory. NLT is one of or the most defensible moral theory there is.
You think these guys would become conscientious objectors if they got the order to man the gas chamber? You think they would have passed up the chance to visit Epstein island?
But you're never going to get that out of the prompt that is being used to generate these Pelicans. You're judging it on something that's not even being attempted.
He literally said on the August podcast that they wouldn’t do it because it would be a short-term gimmick. As I type, CNBC (who pumps them every hour of the day) is talking about how suspicious it looks.
If we assume that on the podcast he presented a well reasoned opinion based on competitive analysis and public sentiment and whatnot, which is a big if for this guy, then I'd ask what changed? If he's truly desperate now, why wasn't he 2 months ago?
Maybe he just looked at their analytics and saw that everyone is trying to have virtual sex with it?
Imagine learning all the keyboard shortcuts for every website you use nowadays.
For example I worked at a video store long ago that had some dos program to manage everything, I didn't own a computer and I didn't use any other software. It was still often a slow turd, and it wasn't networked with the 2 other local stores, so if I wanted to know if a customer had an account there, or if they had some stock there, I had to call.