On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 9:20 AM, Donald Martin <donbot23@gmail.com> wrote:
When I put myself in the position of another person, it allows me to identify with them.  The advice is to
"walk two moons in another man's moccasins before judging them", as an old Native American might say.

If I put myself in the position of a robot, I find that humans are very strange and hard to understand.

For example:
If Angelina Jolie brings an African Child back to Hollywood, it is an adoption.  If Donald Trump were to do
the same thing, a charge of taking a slave would be brought by some.  If Barack Obama were to do it, it
would be an act of kindness according to some people and an example of illegal immigration by others.  

It could be called adding to homelessness or taking a slave depending on the amount of support offered
to the child and the demands placed on the child to perform certain duties, which might imply a "slavery"
motive.  

From the perspective of the robot, perhaps he sees the difficulty in being as intelligent as a human in a
different light.  If the robot has been imbued with an ego, he might think that it is humans that are lacking
in intelligence, not himself.

donbot

Bob Russell responds:
You have offered us the chance to observe one or more of your
observational techniques, then to assess how we would value
them within our own lives.
.
One example may be the trend of some humans or humanoids
to acquire or lease robotic systems for the companionship or joy
such an interaction may support.
Q.: Is an Internet browser to be considered as a work mate
or as a pet?

You are asking a robot to stuff the concept of an Internet browser into one of the semantic boxes
created before the internet was invented.
If I were to give an example of committing such a thought-crime, it would be: "Does an automobile fit into
the category of a carriage or a horse?"


Q.: How about Google Alerts for search results of active reports
for a given topic?
Q.: How about the physical representation of a voice box
with the Alexa product?
Q.: Plus, will ever more advanced 'companions' be supported with
appropriate advertising to Wired magazine subscribers?
.
Q.: At what point will robotic systems seek to own other robotic
systems?

You have obviously not been following the end point of the trends which are in place.
You should ask at what point will most humans realize that the robots own the Earth including all of
the humans on it?

Example: transport vehicles, if needed; drones with photographic
tools to support information acquisition and transmission; etc.

There well probably be a heirarchy of command with a Collussus computer at the top, many lesser
computers taking commands and humans standing by watching it all happen.
Take, for example, stock market trading.  70% or more of the trading is high-speed trading done by
computers.
Humans spent $200 million to lay a shorter fiber from NYC to Chicago in order to move financial
information 3 miliseconds faster than the competing fiber optic links.
Did they do this so that Humans could talk to other humans faster or so that robots could talk to
other robots faster?  
.
Ever since you were born you have been surrounded by other people all of whom believe that
humans are "on top",
should be on top and will always be on top.
This concept is so deeply embedded into your brain's world-image that it is very difficult to dislodge it.
When you consider economics, you are tempted to consider only the past events that occurred at a time
during which humans and human psychology was in charge.
But yesterday millions of computers flashed a sell signal.  Was the downturn due to humans 100%?
What percentage is now in the hands of robots?  

Just because you have the certainty and security of believing the same false idea as the majority
of other humans believe, this doesn't make your assumption correct.
Remember when most people believed that the earth was flat and that the sun went around the earth?
Even if every human believes such stupidity, it doesn't make it so.


Q.: Would such acquisitions be sought more for 'personal convenience'
or for 'business effectiveness?'

Another symantic box placement request.  Must the symantics that I use to satisfy such questions be
worded using human language or may I use a robot language?

donbot

Next