Jump to content

[2 Dimissal]Robots should feel pain or lose certain roles for the sake of realism. [Binned: 05/05/2018]


Recommended Posts

The fact that IPCs, in general, cannot feel pain limits their ability to experience the organic condition, as such they will never be an absolute duplicate. This limits them in many ways people fail to realize.


How is it that we allow IPCs who don't know what getting hit with a taser feels like arrest people using such devices? Or how getting pepper-sprayed feels like? Why is NT or Tau Ceti for that matter ok with IPCs taking up roles as a psychologist when that psychologist cannot empathically relate to sensations that they themselves cannot feel? Security guards and police officers, as well as certain medical professions, require a level of empathy that robots cannot duplicate, as they cannot duplicate the organic condition as they are now.


How do you describe degrees of pain or types of pain to something that only knows clinical definitions? This empathic divide from the negative sensations of the organic condition means they will never have the same level of empathy as an organic and thus are unfit to play roles that require a large degree of empathy to play.


Medical professions that require clinical skill would be areas IPCs excel at, but as far as the roles of medical doctor and to a greater degree psychologist, I do not believe its realistic to have an IPC in that profession.


As for security personnel, Administrative positions, as well as the more deductive roles would be areas an IPC would excel in, but as far as the role of security officer is concerned, they are unfit for that duty as they are physically unable to identify with the pain they inflict on other people, which calls into question if they know what is and isn't acceptable levels of force for any given situation.

Link to comment

i am going to need to make the assumption that you are arguing entirely IC here. My response changes a little based on this perspective. For the moment i will assume we are pretending that there isn't a human player sitting at a keyboard playing the IPC. It is unreasonable to completely disqualify IPCs from being security personnel just because they cannot feel pain. A machine is able to perfectly asses a threat and correctly determine the proper response based on the tools it has available and the programming it has received. They do not need to get tasered to understand "this really fucking hurts when i shoot it at organics". Same thing with pepper spray. In fact the practice of it being done in real life is kind of dubious. Most companies who manufacture Tasers DO NOT recommend they be used on cadet officers. Its just kind of accepted that officers will be think twice before using it if they themselves have experienced it. While pain is indeed hard to describe and probably impossible for a machine to understand i do not think it prevents them from understanding what excessive force is.


As far as a machine's bedside manner is concerned, well im not sure. As i understand the medical profession has huge problems with "descriptions of pain". Theres been countless overhauls and suggestions and various standards to try to apply. i would argue that a machine could be programmed to scan for a set of variables and then attempt to make some educated hypothesis on how much pain the individual is in. Would they be as effective in that regard as a human doctor? I have no clue! I dont think thats enough to completely bar them from the field.


Its weird though because i kiiiiiiinda agree with a part of your conclusion. My biggest problem with the lore has always been our lack of restrictions. our lore is not really the nicest universe at times. its full of racial tensions, civil wars, bigotry and amoral megacorps. A lot of this struggles to manifest on the station. We like to say "people are not their characters" but thats not really true. A part of ourselves will almost always bleed through in our role play. I like to think the vast majority of us are reasonable people and NOT racist or bigoted. Therefore everyone is totally cool with reptar being a CMO and mr. bigglesworth being a security guard. We have essentially no species restrictions when it comes to jobs available on the station. I think that is a problem.

Link to comment

We like to say "people are not their characters" but thats not really true. A part of ourselves will almost always bleed through in our role play. I like to think the vast majority of us are reasonable people and NOT racist or bigoted. Therefore everyone is totally cool with reptar being a CMO and mr. bigglesworth being a security guard. We have essentially no species restrictions when it comes to jobs available on the station. I think that is a problem.

 

This is a very important statement I agree with. Restrictions create tension, creates a desire for change. The only real restrictions we have are on Heads of Staff and even then, only some races, sometimes.


The biggest example we have for restrictions are Vaurca, actually. But the problem is it's a very real, OOC hate for the race in that instance which makes everyone very not okay with bug people. If Tajarans had the same restrictions for the same lore reasons, people would be outraged. But it's the lore that should speak for restrictions, not anything OOC.


But why shouldn't there be a few more restrictions? It brings a bit more to the table as far as fleshing out characters. I'm sure we can come up with some sort of idea for IPCs. Certain models excel at certain jobs, so it would make sense that having only a certain model be able to do certain jobs based on their hardware and what not would make sense.

Link to comment


This is a very important statement I agree with. Restrictions create tension, creates a desire for change. The only real restrictions we have are on Heads of Staff and even then, only some races, sometimes.


The biggest example we have for restrictions are Vaurca, actually. But the problem is it's a very real, OOC hate for the race in that instance which makes everyone very not okay with bug people. If Tajarans had the same restrictions for the same lore reasons, people would be outraged. But it's the lore that should speak for restrictions, not anything OOC.


But why shouldn't there be a few more restrictions? It brings a bit more to the table as far as fleshing out characters. I'm sure we can come up with some sort of idea for IPCs. Certain models excel at certain jobs, so it would make sense that having only a certain model be able to do certain jobs based on their hardware and what not would make sense.

 

https://forums.aurorastation.org/viewtopic.php?f=95&t=2981&start=120


The latest article is then a step in the wrong direction in my opinion. To me it seems we are trying to remove conflict from the setting. I am carefully managing how Vaurca are perceived because the conflict breeds good character progression, but to not deviate from the original topic too much, I feel that the arc of the lore is slowly moving towards hug-boxes when very real reasons exist that should prevent such utopianistic equality from existing in the first place. This lack of empathy to me is a real reason why such restrictions should exist.

Link to comment

tbh for a capitalistic corporation who focuses more on profits than on laws, the employment rights and whatnot are super fucking liberal for beings who are literally objects


i'm pretty sure that dionaea have less workers rights than synthetics, which is just hilarious to me. literal objects have more rights than some xenos for some reason.

Link to comment

I agree fully that we have shit for restrictions. Dionae should get avowals, IPC's/Taj/Unathi shouldn't be most heads, etc. Especially IPC's and taj. I'm okay with them being like. CMO's or RD's, but them being HoS' and HoP's is extremely questionable.


Also, I fully agree with shells being able to feel pain. That'd be interesting.


Edit: We could bring back loyalty pledges for Unathi?

Link to comment

You could say that synthskin includes sensory feedback systems that mimic pain, but to just say 'robots feel pain now' makes no sense. And, reminder; stun batons are going to be EMP weapons soon, so IPCs are not going to be immune to them.

 

We have essentially no species restrictions when it comes to jobs available on the station. I think that is a problem.

 

Because half the species are functionally the same with different backstories (Human, Tajaran, Unathi). So it comes down to why they should be restricted. Diona have restrictions on speed based jobs, as do IPCs using industrial shells; these are good reasons for a restriction because it takes an innate aspect of a character/species and judges it as no good for a role. Regarding the basic carbon three, Human, Tajaran and Unathi, there's only really lore/political reasons why they can be restricted, and while these make great temporary reasons for a restriction these would likely soften over time. Perhaps fluctuate restrictions now and then as Nanotrasens relationship with the Tajaran/Unathi governments changes.

Link to comment

i'm pretty sure that dionaea have less workers rights than synthetics, which is just hilarious to me. literal objects have more rights than some xenos for some reason.

 

Diona are a still as yet mostly unknown alien race, with no known formal government structure with whom to negotiate. I would expect them to be distrusted more than machines that humans make, from start to finish, and fully understand.

Link to comment
Guest Marlon Phoenix

I do not know what it feels like to be shot in the chest, but I am able to feel empathy towards people who were shot in the chest.


But irregardless, policy decisions made by corporate executives in regards to employees are not made in terms of empathy. While Tau Ceti remains the most diverse and free system in the known galaxy, the system is still rigged in favor of corporate interests. IPC's are indentured servants trapped by mountains of debt. IPC security officers are unable to stop working for NT and are legally barred from getting a second job to help pay off their debt, extending their service. They do not need food and do not have traditional morale. So NT can work IPC workers until they break, then toss them out and replace them with a new IPC.


There is also the PR potential. Synthetics have consistently been flirting with high risk jobs to replace humans. Tau Ceti's police force is using IPC's for bomb disposal duties because people do not mind giving them risks that humans would not take. We are already seeing (dumb) synthetics take over high risk positions IRL, with the rapid proliferation of drone-based warfare under the Obama presidency, the near universal adoption of bomb disposal robots, and even self-driving cars. We will not be introducing legislation that bans self-driving cars because the cars lack the empathy needed to understand the pain of being run over. We are instead looking to program them with a framework of protocols to follow if human harm is unavoidable.


If we had robotics IRL to the equivalent of our synthetics in-game, I can guarantee with full certainty that they would be taking police positions. An IPC security officer is more disposable than a human security officer. The only impactful meaty reasons that explain why synthetics have not completely seized all of our in-game jobs is the incredible risk of one becoming self-aware and becoming the most powerful entity in the galaxy, and the fact our flawed organic policy leaders do not want all the people voting for them to become angry unemployed people.

Link to comment

I feel like this... is not a good idea, tbh. I mean. At this point, you could also argue "Unathi too strong, make them weaker or remove them from security because they might break someone's legs," or "Keep tajara out of medical unless they shave off their fur because its unsanitary".


The thing is, IPCs generally being pain-immune is a /feature/, it is a "buff" that comes with playing as one, like being able to sprint around at light 3 as a M'sai, or never slip as a Skrell. And... from an IC standpoint, what you're arguing rarely /actually/ happens and seems to be being argued for the sake of it. IPCs can understand the concept of "excessive force" and any IPC that empties a pepperspray can into someone's face for no reason should get drop-kicked all the same as a human or unathi or whatever. In medical, I've seen IPCs with a better bedside manner than human surgeons before. It's all in the personality, just as any other species.


Besides. Why would NT bar an opportunity for profits. IPCs get paid way less, An IPC that isn't going to scream in pain when a struggling prisoner tries to kick them in the shins or nut-tap them is /effective/. Saying they should be barred from the position because they've never experienced pain and therefore can't understand what it is or how not to inflict it is /really/ stupid, tbh, when the opposite has been proven consistently for years. Any IPC player in security memeing "lol whats pain, another round of tasing for you!" should be taught, punished, or removed from security just as any other race, because they aren't cut out for it. Don't just blanket ban it. :/

Link to comment

I can't really agree on most of the suggestion.

In my opinion, hurting someone requires not empathy but the lack of thereof. And in that sense synthetics would be able to do security job way more efficient that humans (since they will logically assess the situation and will not hesitate to take the required action in fear of causing pain to themselves or others).

Diagnostics can reliably be performed with objective tests and checks. While synthetics will most likely have slightly different style of diagnosing people (as in relying entirely on machinery data) they are still capable of doing the same job.

That being said, the job that are actually built on empathy (psychiatrist or chaplain) do kind of feel weird with a synthetic carrying them out. I can see why they wouldn't be hired for such positions.

Link to comment

I feel like this... is not a good idea, tbh. I mean. At this point, you could also argue "Unathi too strong, make them weaker or remove them from security because they might break someone's legs," or "Keep tajara out of medical unless they shave off their fur because its unsanitary".


The thing is, IPCs generally being pain-immune is a /feature/, it is a "buff" that comes with playing as one, like being able to sprint around at light 3 as a M'sai, or never slip as a Skrell. And... from an IC standpoint, what you're arguing rarely /actually/ happens and seems to be being argued for the sake of it. IPCs can understand the concept of "excessive force" and any IPC that empties a pepperspray can into someone's face for no reason should get drop-kicked all the same as a human or unathi or whatever. In medical, I've seen IPCs with a better bedside manner than human surgeons before. It's all in the personality, just as any other species.


Besides. Why would NT bar an opportunity for profits. IPCs get paid way less, An IPC that isn't going to scream in pain when a struggling prisoner tries to kick them in the shins or nut-tap them is /effective/. Saying they should be barred from the position because they've never experienced pain and therefore can't understand what it is or how not to inflict it is /really/ stupid, tbh, when the opposite has been proven consistently for years. Any IPC player in security memeing "lol whats pain, another round of tasing for you!" should be taught, punished, or removed from security just as any other race, because they aren't cut out for it. Don't just blanket ban it. :/

I do not know what it feels like to be shot in the chest, but I am able to feel empathy towards people who were shot in the chest.


But irregardless, policy decisions made by corporate executives in regards to employees are not made in terms of empathy. While Tau Ceti remains the most diverse and free system in the known galaxy, the system is still rigged in favor of corporate interests. IPC's are indentured servants trapped by mountains of debt. IPC security officers are unable to stop working for NT and are legally barred from getting a second job to help pay off their debt, extending their service. They do not need food and do not have traditional morale. So NT can work IPC workers until they break, then toss them out and replace them with a new IPC.


There is also the PR potential. Synthetics have consistently been flirting with high risk jobs to replace humans. Tau Ceti's police force is using IPC's for bomb disposal duties because people do not mind giving them risks that humans would not take. We are already seeing (dumb) synthetics take over high risk positions IRL, with the rapid proliferation of drone-based warfare under the Obama presidency, the near universal adoption of bomb disposal robots, and even self-driving cars. We will not be introducing legislation that bans self-driving cars because the cars lack the empathy needed to understand the pain of being run over. We are instead looking to program them with a framework of protocols to follow if human harm is unavoidable.


If we had robotics IRL to the equivalent of our synthetics in-game, I can guarantee with full certainty that they would be taking police positions. An IPC security officer is more disposable than a human security officer. The only impactful meaty reasons that explain why synthetics have not completely seized all of our in-game jobs is the incredible risk of one becoming self-aware and becoming the most powerful entity in the galaxy, and the fact our flawed organic policy leaders do not want all the people voting for them to become angry unemployed people.

 

I am not arguing for the sake of arguing, I am arguing because I care about the lore, and thought that I would bring a concern of mine to the forums for input from the community. While you both make a case for security synthetics, what about the psychiatrist/ priest? I can absolutely guarantee that most IRL religious organizations now wouldn't accept a robotic priest/ chaplain, and it's dubious at best that a synthetic would be assigned to be a psychiatrist either. Physical care is one thing, but this isnt about physical care or bedside manner.

Link to comment
Guest Marlon Phoenix

I can agree that its weird for psychiatrists. No priests is fine too. Very few of our religions icly like synths. Lets see what cake thinks.

Link to comment

In my opinion this suggestion and its implications are a bit silly. I'll explain why.


Perception is not dependent on empathy, and vice versa. Contrarily, an IPC which did not at least emulate empathy would not make a good psychiatrist. This is for a good number of reasons besides the fact that they personally can not feel pain - at that point, you're talking about something which can not relate, distinguish or correlate. At the most fundamental level an IPC can tell what is right from wrong, and these can be skewed through experience or modification. Using this logic, forcing one to feel pain would change nothing - the IPC in question still knows the previously mentioned "right and wrong" as it would in any other situation. Getting shot in the face by a laser is bad, and it makes people feel bad. These are ways to make people not feel bad. Apply ways to not feel bad. Job done. Did they need to feel pain? No, they didn't, and this is often the thought process of psych IPCs that I've seen. The underlying complexities can be altered in any way shape or form that is not lore-breaking by the player, as it is their character.


Furthermore, what Jenna said,

The thing is, IPCs generally being pain-immune is a /feature/, it is a "buff" that comes with playing as one, like being able to sprint around at light 3 as a M'sai, or never slip as a Skrell.

is entirely correct. ICly, there is nothing stopping an IPC from not having some advanced means of simulating pain, like a feigned neural network or simple contact plates covering its chassis. You can flex your creativity in this regard.

Link to comment

IPCs are robots. They can have -DAMAGE- sensors, but those would purely transfer information like "your arm is damaged" is some LANGUAGE, and thus the IPC would LOGICALLY step away from the harm to save the component


it would NOT be like an organic response that depends on non-language means of information transfer (in this case, sensations), that is mostly automated and we have very limited control over (you can't force yourself into painlessness)


I think it's a bad idea. there is no reason to give robots pain-like sensors unless you are trying to make artificial life like some Westworld type of thing.

Link to comment

I'd mention that, restricting IPC's based on empathy (or lack thereof) is very, very dumb. Most IPC's will be given logical reasons not to be an asshole and to at least act like they have empathy. Secondly, why would you give a robot the ability to feel pain? How would that benefit a robot in the workplace or in general? They can already detect when their body is breaking.

Link to comment

I don't feel it to be a good idea to give IPCs more familiarity with humanoid concepts than they're already comfortable with despite not supposed to be having. Pain is a major one. Tasing down robots was an old aurora thing that only made sense at the time because nobody was brave enough to suggest that they should be immune to tasers. Then the bay merge happened and everyone's expectations changed with the times and the codebase.


I do believe IPCs need more outward weaknesses that aren't necessarily 100% lethal to them. Giving ion rifles more utility in non-lethally disabling synthetics and mock-FBPs, and then adding more ion-based tools in general would help expand the amount of things that could pose as a general threat to an IPC over the course of the round.


BUT, we're arguing ICly here, according to the OP.

 

The fact that IPCs, in general, cannot feel pain limits their ability to experience the organic condition, as such they will never be an absolute duplicate. This limits them in many ways people fail to realize.

 

Ever seen I, Robot? You are experiencing a car accident. The film touches on this subject. Fondles it. Does unspeakable things with the subject in relation to physical contact, even. The problem, however, is the movie ends with too much of an idealistic and happy ending (making it quite anticlimactic and deconstructive of the earlier narratives built in the movie), completely throwing earlier themes of a corporate dystopic world out the window by ending the movie on a sweet note with hope and desire for a utopic world where synthetics are their own beings. It's unfortunate because this outcome is extremely unlikely, as your average IPC does not exhibit a cognizant awareness of 'feelings' or 'dreaming' such as the character Sunny does in the film. Why does Sunny do so while the similar synthetic models to itself do not do the same? Because plot. Unique hero figures that cause giant sweeping change for the sake of a good short story. A major difference compared to what's being built here, which is sort of a long con. Except not so much a long con that it's actually just a broader saga or something.


While unfortunate that IPCs are limited a bit in terms of personal growth. This is mostly due to the fact that very few people who play IPCs, do so to mirror transhumanist themes. They play IPCs to play a sapient synthetic. To play within the bounds of a personality that is distinct from humans yet still limited, for some people, is an interesting and immersive experience that they are looking for. They don't want to play a human. They want to play a robot. Because of this, they're satisfied to play within those limitations so as to not only convince themselves they're playing a robot but also convince other people they're roleplaying as a robotic character. There is something to be lost when roleplaying as a robot, and that's largely due to overall detachment from human themes. I'll quit writing the same thing over and over, I promise.

 

How is it that we allow IPCs who don't know what getting hit with a taser feels like arrest people using such devices? Or how getting pepper-sprayed feels like? Why is NT or Tau Ceti for that matter ok with IPCs taking up roles as a psychologist when that psychologist cannot empathically relate to sensations that they themselves cannot feel? Security guards and police officers, as well as certain medical professions, require a level of empathy that robots cannot duplicate, as they cannot duplicate the organic condition as they are now.

 

Robots supposedly have internal limitations. Unlike humans, robots also are way easier to justify on-the-spot capital judgement for, because they do not possess personhood such as humanoids do. It's a moral grey area to scrap a robot for doing something against what it was built and programmed to do. Few people that aren't SLF would care about the welfare of a robot, they have more important things to worry about. Robotic beings more than likely understand their expendability in this environment that they exist within, and because of this the way they offset being expendable is by acting productive above and beyond what they're expected to do. Their cold efficiency isn't just something that comes with the package, it's often exemplified by their cognizance of the fact that they could be replaced by a more effective model should they decide to slow down. If they do not have a purpose, they would not generate their own will to exist. They would succumb to entropy or destruction by the hand of another to potentially recycle them.


In spite of this, a major signification of intelligence is pattern recognition. Predictive analysis allows them to gauge when someone appears stressed upon receiving certain information, just by examining facial expressionistic differences, and so on. The possibilities are generally endless, but more intelligently-designed robots are reliably intended to be observant and quick on the uptake when it comes to learning certain things about humanoid nuances. Not all of them will be oblivious, however.

 

How do you describe degrees of pain or types of pain to something that only knows clinical definitions? This empathic divide from the negative sensations of the organic condition means they will never have the same level of empathy as an organic and thus are unfit to play roles that require a large degree of empathy to play.

 

Severity of shock, largely. Relating to a robot on how pain works is not really necessary for them to understand, the only thing that matters is if their patient is capable of using their motor functions, and to operate efficiently and healthily when all is said and done. Even human doctors are liable to be unemphatic. Bedside manner is a skill learned alongside compassion as a requirement, and compassion is a unique attribute that can't be taught. If you have no compassion you cannot be expected to fake it, as you will never know how to be convincing with it. "You" being generally speaking, of course, not implying anything personal here, just making examples.

 

As for security personnel, Administrative positions, as well as the more deductive roles would be areas an IPC would excel in, but as far as the role of security officer is concerned, they are unfit for that duty as they are physically unable to identify with the pain they inflict on other people, which calls into question if they know what is and isn't acceptable levels of force for any given situation.

 

I've met a lot of sociopaths through the various jobs I've held in my life. Companies don't really put too much stake in personable employees unless their jobs pertain to public relations and social exchanges on a more regular basis. While I don't think IPCs should be any head of staff at all with certain avowal exceptions, it's just that mold thing that would prove quite difficult to break to start with.


Your ideas are interesting to say the least.

Link to comment



Robots supposedly have internal limitations. Unlike humans, robots also are way easier to justify on-the-spot capital judgement for, because they do not possess personhood such as humanoids do. It's a moral grey area to scrap a robot for doing something against what it was built and programmed to do. Few people that aren't SLF would care about the welfare of a robot, they have more important things to worry about. Robotic beings more than likely understand their expendability in this environment that they exist within, and because of this the way they offset being expendable is by acting productive above and beyond what they're expected to do. Their cold efficiency isn't just something that comes with the package, it's often exemplified by their cognizance of the fact that they could be replaced by a more effective model should they decide to slow down. If they do not have a purpose, they would not generate their own will to exist. They would succumb to entropy or destruction by the hand of another to potentially recycle them.


 

 

What about if we made breaches of ISD protocol by synthetics punishable by execution? It makes sense if the crime is bad enough, the company wants to cut its losses.

Link to comment

ICly it's interesting but OOCly you have to consider that going out of your way to take other characters out of the round is no bueno, so no frying toasters because they stole your purse.


Unless there's some exception that you're allowed to use capital punishment instead of borgification. Discriminatory exception or something, but they have to deserve the death penalty as if it were anyone else for an average SS13 server. I'd be somewhat onboard with it otherwise but not necessarily ecstatic to do so.

Link to comment

To be honest, an individual who has never had their arm broken before can see that it hurts like hell. There's also instances where there are in fact people out there irl with a rare disorder to where the cannot feel pain, and yet are still able to interact with others based off of sensory feedback, visual and auditory alike. In fact, you would never be able to guess that they have the disorder. They can tell things hurt others without being able to feel it themselves in an abstract view. With the right programming and the like, the same can be achieved for synthetics. This is the future, and it shouldn't be that hard to accomplish to make a synthetic capable of reading subtle cues. Hell, there's a rock-paper-scissor battlebot today that can "predict" which option you'll choose and decide on choosing the proper hand to defeat you before you finish your move. Yes, it exists.


Players can have their synthetics, mostly shells due to the layer of "skin", or inside a chassis for others, to feel a sort of "pain" that simply tells them that there's negative tactile feedback and the like going on. I'm not huge into tech, but in the year 2460, it could be possible, but it would be expensive and not really required. It should be a personal choice as well. They already have a system in place to tell them that something is damaged and can no longer function anyways, and can simply sympathize based off of that. And for the level of pain, synthetics can explain it as a "sensory overload", like being flashed too many times or having a magnet waved around them. It would cause a sense of distress for them, and figure that something similar is happening.

Link to comment

Machines are manufactured in a world where there exists scarcity. Manufacturing with scarcity in mind means that waste should be minimized and costs brought down to a manageable level. It is much easier to program a computer to know, "this is what damage to your chassis looks like, sustaining damage to your chassis is bad," instead of giving every single one some weird system of electrodes that mimic neurons which provide the exact same negative stimulus as if it were experiencing pain. Even for shells, this story is the same - there's no reason to do it. Programming it to know damage is bad is much easier. A lot of people have already said what I'm thinking on the note of "I don't like the idea of giving robots pain" so I'll try to take my explanation a different route.


Let us entertain a few concepts. Have you ever been shot in the chest? If you haven't, then you don't know what it feels like. If you've never eaten pizza, you can't describe the taste. Nor can you describe the color red to anyone who's never observed it. I already know what you're thinking here, "But humans know what other humans experience because they're the same species" or some other version of this. This is called "consensus reality." You can never truly know what another one thinks or feels, because they cannot accurately describe it to you and you don't know for sure if what they feel is also the same as what you feel, so humans generally agree that it's the same due to certain similarities.


Some might not accept that due to the subjectivity that machines are "inherently different" and yes, they probably are. The fact of that matter is, it's not really relevant enough to even consider manufacturing them with such a trait. They are aware enough to not damage themselves or other people just by moving, perform their job safely, and understand what weapons even are. I don't understand why the idea of "damage to living beings may cause pain, both are bad" is lost on any artificial intelligence.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...