Hot Button Topics (religion, politics, sports)

Chocofreak13 · March 16, 2013, 03:51:03 PM

i wish we DID eat them. at least they wouldn't live on that way.

but you can't tell me you're alright with ALL animal testing. they experiment on KITTENS, man. ;^;

NejinOniwa · March 16, 2013, 04:31:52 PM

That was probably meant to make me feel sad, but all it did was make me laugh at the hilarious clip below it about spiders on drugs and their effects on web-spinning...and other things.

In all honesty though, my opinion on that particular case:
Why kittens? Using an animal with that sort of cultural attachment (instead of say, rats) does seem a bit unnecessary in this context. Could have been changed. Still, that is only because we, the human race, value cats more than we value rats, since they are of more use to us (that use being killing rats in fact). If it were instead, say, a question of experimenting on Zebras vs Giraffes, or Woodpeckers vs Hummingbirds, there wouldn't have been much of a riot. Yes, the experiment is cruel, but there's no other feasible way to research it available, and the end result of the experiment is ultimately a lot of interesting, valuable data that can be used in future medicine. The main conflict here is that the animal experimented on was one of significantly larger cultural value, and that there is an equally suitable (I think - I don't have the specifics of the experiments so I can't be certain) candidate for the experiment in the average laboratory mouse/rat, which is a lot more acceptable as an experimental subject.

TL;DR - I don't really have a large problem with it. I can see why some people would find certain experiments horrifying, and to minimize conflict between the scientific community and the populace at large cutting down on those experiments or making them more acceptable is recommendable. An oppressed scientific community doesn't get as much funding as a well-liked one, after all, and that leads to less and slower progress, and probably in directions we don't need (like more weapons research).

Chocofreak13 · March 16, 2013, 06:47:11 PM

it's all our opinion here, after all. i'm not gonna debate that point any further since it's an acceptable answer, and, as stated, your opinion. but i'm curious as to what you think of the logical extension of it. there's an interesting scenario in Sword Art Online that can be referenced here (putting it in a spoiler in case anyone hasn't watched the whole show yet):

Spoiler: Show

NejinOniwa · March 16, 2013, 07:31:56 PM

In this case I'll be treating these "captured minds" or whatever as de-facto AI's, since I don't know the full context of things. But: No, I would not. In the case of it being some sort of mindtrap it'd be a hostage situation (and I don't think you need to ask me that question to know where I stand on that), but in the case of any individual managing to create new sentient life it is his responsibility to ensure these new lifeforms are treated with the same respect as humans. Be it talking pigs or thinking computers, an artificially created sapient is just as much a man's child as his biological offspring.

I would not have any (or at least, not as much) problems with this if he, say, gave these captured minds awareness of their situation and granted them some level of digital independence, so to speak. Arbitrarily trapping unwilling sapients in a game, however? Not only does it reek of generic bad guy plot, it's also stupid and ultimately self-destructive (like most generic bad guy behavior tends to be in the end).

Chocofreak13 · March 16, 2013, 09:03:37 PM

they're not AIs, for the record, they're real people who are stuck in a sort of stasis. if you've ever seen anything .hack, this series borrows a lot from that. (including the composer; he worked on both soundtracks and both sound divine. -w- )

am inclined to agree, considering that was the case here. random creepy bad guy traps a bunch of people for the purpose of unpaid experimentation. no free will involved here. but my question here is, why not just pay the people and not go through all the trouble of catching them and holding them hostage? :\

eh, either way, it's set to be resolved soon, since we'll be wrapping up the series this week.

we need a new topic.......how about where to draw the line of man vs machine? like, do you support the virtualization of human minds (aka the singularity movement), how much machine can a human be before not being human anymore, were robots to walk among us, would they be treated the same way humans would be and why, etc etc.

Bella · March 16, 2013, 10:53:16 PM

Quote from: Chocofreak13 on March 16, 2013, 09:03:37 PMwe need a new topic.......how about where to draw the line of man vs machine? like, do you support the virtualization of human minds (aka the singularity movement), how much machine can a human be before not being human anymore, were robots to walk among us, would they be treated the same way humans would be and why, etc etc.

Borderline-transhumanist reporting in, I'd write a lengthy post about my feelings on this subject but I have to sleep now. Drats. : (

Suffice to say, I think the merging of humans and machines would (will?) probably be a positive thing. As for defining humanity ... as long as those beings have what we recognize as "human nature" (however you want to define that) they'll still be human. Humanity is defined by the mind, not the body, after all.

Chocofreak13 · March 16, 2013, 11:28:33 PM

here's another question for you, then. should we as humans cross that line? should we create robots with humanity?

Nichi · March 16, 2013, 11:48:24 PM

On the subject of sentient robots, as Mega Man X has taught me, it's very much a double-edged sword; on one hand, there's the chance of a robot going homicidal, but at the same time, there's the chance of it doing good in the world and creating things to help people.

As for singularity, I'm a bit uncomfortable over the idea because it makes me think I'd become a brainless Cyberman, plus the fact it'd most likely mean living forever which I honestly wouldn't want .___.

Chocofreak13 · March 17, 2013, 12:17:03 AM

i do, which is why i dig it. plug me in and download my mind into the net, man. just make me a digital room to sit in with my plushies and my anime, and i'm golden for the rest of eternity. -w-

as for robots, it'd be nice if project aiko could take off. :\

Nichi · March 17, 2013, 10:17:56 AM

Mmm :\

Also, maybe if I could be with 2k-tan, I'd consider the "upgrade" >w>;;

Chocofreak13 · March 17, 2013, 10:55:55 AM

there is the potential there, from what i can tell. :\

EDIT: hey guys, whenever we get done with the current topic, i have another one for ya: assisted suicide.

alfonso_rd_30 · March 18, 2013, 02:42:03 AM

Mmmm... robots... I can't wait...

singularity... I really wouldn't like to have my whole mind on the net

Simonorged · March 18, 2013, 07:50:30 AM

With the correct amount of security I would defiantly Transport my mind to the web.
Of course there would have to be an emotion synthesizer. As only your memories are transferred.

Chocofreak13 · March 18, 2013, 08:23:02 PM

virtual emotions aren't too far off, with the proper amount of mental study.

Simonorged · March 19, 2013, 07:23:17 AM

Yes but, aren't emotions related chemically as well as physically?
Without a body are we capable of feeling any emotion?
Compassion, it starts with a feeling in my chest
Fear, it starts in my head.
And love, obviously starts (for me) in the heart and another place.

Without the parts to feel such emotions, wouldn't we become cold and lifeless.
For testing purposes, I'd want only a copy of me in the internet. I'd likely be a worm type file so I could travel on my own. And the ability to talk to it.