Questionable ethics - Living Memory

[Turtledeluxe]

The Endless are copies of sentient beings. What people are really getting at is what I've always said, they're not really the original person who died. They are a new instance of the person who is running on memories prior to their death. So it's extremely debatable to look at an intangible copy of a sentient being purely acting based on memories (and not the original conscious experience) and call that sentient. Just being self aware or able to learn doesn't automatically make something sentient.

As far as sentience, it's not clear that they're actually feeling emotions or dreaming for example. All that's clear is that those behaviors are coded in their memory aether.

It's not like Cachiua never learned, engineered or traveled before becoming an Endless for example.

Whats garbage imo, is stopping at the most basic understanding of sentience and ignoring all the context around it. There's a practicality in distinguishing continuity regarding the original consciousness.

[lolnotacat]

What people are really getting at....

Ah so if we're able to make clones and copy their memories, it's totally fine to kill them with impunity? I'm of the camp that in that situation that would be its own distinct individual with said memories.

Just being self aware...

It's one of the most important critera. But I'll go all out and slap the definition of sentient at the bottom and we'll see if the endless met all the criteria.

As far as sentience, it's not clear....

As far as sentience, it's not clear that you're actually feeling emotions or dreaming for example. All that's clear is that your behavior is coded into your DNA. I hope that shows why whole argument as to where their ability to interact comes from is a moot point. The moment they can interact with new information an with the world around them shows they are sentient to some degree because it's not a binary, it's a gradient. As someone who trains AI at my company, I can tell you that it is not on the gradient of sentient because it cannot cope or understand new situations.

It's not like Cachiua never learned....

She's aware of her surroundings and is able to adapt to them. If she were just a program of her copied memories, she'd only be able to handle situations she was in before. Unless you're saying she had previously piloted a robot body to lead a rebellion and help her still living son shut down a supercomputer so warriors could stop a rogue AI from invading another shard.

Whats garbage imo, is stopping at the most....

Ironic because they were acting in a sentient manner the entire time, and every example of them being "just a copy" is just a "nuh uh because the writers said so" without providing any actual counterpoints to the definition of sentient.

Since I'm so nice, I'll make it easy:



Sentient:
1. Conscious or self-aware.
Yup, they were all conscious of their situation and self aware. They were able to adapt to their situation and novel information.
2. Experiencing sensation, thinking, thought, or feeling.
They definitely were experiencing all that -- Love, dreams for the future, happiness, sadness.
3.Possessing human-like knowledge and intelligence.
I don't think any of them didn't possess human-like knowledge and intelligence.

[Turtledeluxe]

Ah so if we're able to make clones and copy their memories, it's totally fine to kill them with impunity? I'm of the camp that in that situation that would be its own distinct individual with said memories.

This is false because it wasn't done with impunity. Your tendency to distort things is concerning.

It's one of the most important critera. But I'll go all out and slap the definition of sentient at the bottom and we'll see if the endless met all the criteria.

It's a definition, not the definition. A shallow one I've never heard of. Sentience, consciousness, DNA are all hotly debated subjects. That's really the problem is none of these things rooted in chemical reactions, biological processes, evolution, etc are comparable to magic memory aether used to clone people.

As far as sentience, it's not clear that you're actually feeling emotions or dreaming for example. All that's clear is that your behavior is coded into your DNA. I hope that shows why whole argument as to where their ability to interact comes from is a moot point. The moment they can interact with new information an with the world around them shows they are sentient to some degree because it's not a binary, it's a gradient. As someone who trains AI at my company, I can tell you that it is not on the gradient of sentient because it cannot cope or understand new situations.

[
But DNA itself is not crystal clear, so that's a moot point. Aside from the theoreticals, DNA has a way more unique application in the real world from memory aether. DNA can, albeit very slowly, result in novel behaviors. We are talking about memory aether being copied. That's very specific. We know how it came to be and how it's being applied. I'm glad you work in this field and understand that we have not remotely achieved consciousness in AI.

she's aware of her surroundings and is able to adapt to them. If she were just a program of her copied memories, she'd only be able to handle situations she was in before. Unless you're saying she had previously piloted a robot body to lead a rebellion and help her still living son shut down a supercomputer so warriors could stop a rogue AI from invading another shard.

I didn't say she is a program per say. I said that her behavior isn't provably novel. Only the situations she is in are novel.

Sentient:
1. Conscious or self-aware.
Yup, they were all conscious of their situation and self aware. They were able to adapt to their situation and novel information.
2. Experiencing sensation, thinking, thought, or feeling.
They definitely were experiencing all that -- Love, dreams for the future, happiness, sadness.
3.Possessing human-like knowledge and intelligence.
I don't think any of them didn't possess human-like knowledge and intelligence.

It's just a definition, not the definition, and not one I would regard as an authoritative source. It also lacks context, because we are talking specifically about a separate instance of an original person who had their own consciousness and their own subjective experience resulting from highly influential DNA and and a CNS interacting with the material world.

Endless are non physical and can't interact with the real world outside of a proxy body. And even then all of their thinking would be impossible without that specific memory aether. Unlike DNA and humans (potential has shifted over time and varies per organism) Endless have zero potential at one specific time to do anything or be anyone without the original conscious experience to emulate.