Yeah computers programming other computers or themselves, that could (eventually) lead to a synthetic consciousness, or worse, self-replicating machines.

if it can realize what its doing svcks then yep. if it isn't smart enough to rebel on it's own then nope. if its both give it a pat on the head then send it to enforce your reign of terror anyway.

Yep, random posts on a video game forum are going to matter to the future of mankind! You heard it here first folks!

We are so far from AI in any real sense that a video game in 2015 isn't going to have any sort of impact on the ethics involved. Especially since that 'debate' has been in play since the 50's. Let me guess, you thought Ex Machina was fresh, hard hitting sci fi didn't you?

Yes, this is where the powerhouse of future meaning is forged. If anything this thread should be shut down or merged with the other massive circlejerk of 'but Data!'.

How do you know Harkness "just left" maybe someone threw a hammer at his fat head and he went haywire . lets say i wrote code for my sprinklers to turn on at 9 pm everyday, lightning hit my Antenna and the surge of electricity got to my computer and messed with my hard drive, for whatever reason some code in my script was "damaged" and now my sprinklers have decided to work at any random hour . My sprinkler didn't get smart or decided they want to be free, they are just malfunctioning.

Same goes for a talky the toaster aka Harkness. It's been programmed to do all these things! It just does it on the order most logical, the way it's been programmed. That's why it's stuck on a boat doing nothing. All it knows is how to enforce law and order. If it was truly free thinking it would ride a brahmin into the sunset and date a mirelurk.

If you look up the meaning of the word "slave", Merriam-Webster says:

: someone who is legally owned by another person and is forced to work for that person without pay

: a person who is strongly influenced and controlled by something

I would imagine that androids are typically under the ownership of someone, except if they are renegade. However, they would likely still be slaves of their programming?

I said it before and I'll say it again. For as many times as it takes.

The only thing I am absolutely sure of is that I am sapient. Every other person around me COULD be sapient, but from my perspective they could ALSO just make a really convincing show at it. I can't get into their heads and check for myself, after all, and there are currently no known hypothesis or devices that can check for "true" sapience.

Therefore, if an android displays a similar good show at being sapient, I logically MUST assume that it is sapient if I assume all humans are sapient. And owning or enslaving an android would then be evil, since I am (as far as I am concerned) owning another sapient being.

In order for this standpoint to change, someone needs to scientifically define the difference between "true" sapience and "simulated" sapience, and then prove why the latter isn't considered "real" while the former is. Until then, there can be no real difference between the two, as we cannot determine for certain that a bunch of programs aren't actually experiencing life as we do.

yet all of the things said here could happen to a human, because to all intent we are machines too, we just happen to be advance enough, not impossible a man made machine could be so advance.

Like seriously, forget for a moment its a "toaster" judge him by his actions alone, there is no action he does that a human wouldnt do.

My scarecrow scratches his nuts in the wind, scarecrow lives matter. Stop comparing a human life to a piece plastic/metal.

All this slavery talk is just so kinky

2edgy4me

You say like those groups and everything they held dear is somehow evil and wrong just by association... it isnt. just as its not evil that hitler had a dog that he loved, its not evil to own and love a dog now. white supremacists were right in some aspects and were wrong in others.

@OP

we had 2 threads like this already... did we really need a third one?

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1526610-is-ownership-of-advanced-androids-unethical-part-deux/

http://www.gamesas.com/topic/1526502-is-ownership-of-advanced-androids-unethical/

A human is just another animal on this planet, its never above comparison with anything, to think anything diffrent is dangerusly arrogant.

I think you're confusing slavery with master/slave fetishism,

but for sure, Fallout already has such notes in Raider and wasteland clothing

More generally, fiction and particularly science fiction, loves using a futuristic situation as a lens on our own society.

Given that this is about the fourth thread on the topic, I think this is going to be the issue that divides the forums for the next several years. It's like the Imperials v. Stormcloak debate that was rehashed and got intense so many times the moderators forbid anyone from starting another one for a long time. Just like with that topic these arguments are pointless, at no point is either side going to relent and accept that the other is right.

No, it isn't.

"We:" slavery is objectionable.

You: but it's EXTRA objectionable when it's a human being enslaved.

Your the one introducing the condition of worth here. I'll oppose slavery, if mostly 'droids benefit from that huzzah! If the Legion sets up camp next to MIT and there's suddenly thousands upon thousands of human slaves moving through I'd orient my resources to lessening that since the need is obviously greater BEFORE I got to the androids. But chances are the theme of slavery will revolve around androids in this game.

Lol, pretty much yeah. All the raiders are running around in hardcoe bondage gear, I like to pretend they only attack people and act up because they want to be "punished".

Headcannon is fun.

Anyhow, I think android slavery is wrong. But at the same time I hope thats not a large part of the main quest. I really hope that the main factions are not struggling because one wants to free androids and the other doesnt. That would be boring.

To the people comparing the use of androids for their designated functions to travesties like the holocaust, and who say that our justifications that they are 'lower than humans' is akin to the justifications made by oppressive groups throughout history, get real. Black people are humans. Jews are humans. White people, Hispanics, Christians, Muslims, women, gays, etc. are all humans. Their papas impregnated their mammas and said mammas squeezed them into the world. After that, they age, have their experiences, and die.
Androids are built, piece by tiny metallic piece, with the same intention as every other machine: to serve. They aren't born. They don't age. Their blood and organs and everything else is synthetic. No hormones. No reproduction. They aren't biologically alive. Hell, they might not even be able to die unless we put them down ourselves (in Fallout, many robotics can function for virtually indefinite amounts of time). Sure, they are smart. They learn. That doesn't make it any less synthetic. You can care about them all you want, and value them for their intelligence and ability to display their synthetic human-like emotions (and I confess, there is value in that). But calling them human is like calling a rock a crab. It's simply untrue by definition. Calling someone horrible (and that's what you're calling us, if you truly think this is anything akin to the holocaust) on preferring that they serve humans instead of actual human slaves, is incredibly naive.

Calling the synths filthy seems a little over the top, but otherwise this looks good. Pretty good summary of the way I think things should be. Well, maybe the all-eternal part is a bit presumptuous as well. I don't expect humankind to last forever.

And the anti-android crowd, like the Stormcloaks, are already being compared to Nazis in our outlook.

At this point, I think I'm already growing tired of this android mumbo jumbo, and the game hasn't even released yet. You guys should save your ammo until then when we have the details.

Or you know, watch it not be the main plot at all.

Let us hope. The heavy Brotherhood presence in the trailers hints that they'll be a big deal. As much as I'd hate to see another BoS-centric plot, at least that would probably mean less focus on the synths.

You're compared to slavers and other evil folk cuz you take an arbitrary metric they have no control over and say that makes cruelty/slavery/oppression okay. The parallels are there. You take what they are and say that is lesser. Nevermind the fact that whatever they may be they have the same capacity for feeling and thinking as humanity.

If we decoupled the idea of 'humanity' from humans how would we define it? As an ability to think about yourself, your world, to dream, to care, to be creative and spontaneous, to have ambition and pursue it and etc. from what we've seen from Harkness they're capable of a lot of the same things we humans are when it comes to thinking and feeling so the 'but they're NOT!' seems, to me, like a completely superficial point.

I don't see them as humans but I do see them as being capable of humanity.

Would 'free' androids be a good thing for the remnants of humanity?

You might be touching on a truth here. Maybe some humans don't want to see the Synths free because they fear the possibility of the Synths outnumbering the humans and, given a few decades, inheriting the Earth after us. Humans don't want that, generally. We don't want to be replaced by something vastly superior to us. Something that, ironically enough, we humans created.

Accepting that we are anmials would take all the fun out of the discussion.

Is the individual of my kind? No.

Is it capable of harming me? Yes.

Can I stop it if it decides to harm me? Depending on the situation.

Will it make it more difficult for me to sustain myself (compete for resources with me)? Yes.

Animal conclusion: Kill if given the chance. Ignore if fight is risky. (Take advantage of if safely possible - animals are not above cheating other animals out of their hard earned prey)

Pretty much the relationship dogs have to cats and why they hunt them if given the chance (and don't know them personally)

Animals don't think in morals, they only think in "what benefits me the most".

This very issue gives mea lot of hope for F4. Is enslaving androids evil? Maybe, maybe not. At the very least, it's debatable. I wasn't a massive fan of enclave = bad, BoS = good. FNV did a lot to remedy this by giving the Legion some redeemable qualities (organization, security) and giving the NCR some flaws (too spread out, bullying small settlements). Admittedly, it still came off as slightly good vs evil, but it was definitely an improvement.

That's what I like about the enslaving androids discussion. Slavery is bad, but androids are objects. I can imagine a scenario:

You enter the Institute, welcomed by their leaders. They show you the experiments they've been running to restore vegetation to the land. Beautiful colors, smells, and sounds as you enter a room filled with plants, trees, flowers, birds, and bugs. Then, as you're finishing the tour, an Institute personnel pulls you to the side and reveals that they're actually a Railroad spy. They show you rooms filled with shut down androids and android parts, many falling out of the androids just as a gutted person would. A half-destroyed android reaches for you and asks for your help. But it doesn't feel pain so it's not actually suffering.

It's the kind of thing where humanity is put into perspective and you're given good things and bad things about each organization.