I find people without nobel prizes a mockery to real humans.

In any case... If people meant toasters... they would say toasters, when people say human level intelligent machines, they mean human level intelligent machines.

I wasnt done with the post. Intelligent machines are not worth human life.

Your.ideas are just like those in history who would deny human rights. Who would call men beasts, savages, rats or as you now you call humans for machines.

Evil sure likes to repeat itself

Um, I don't think anyone's comparing anything to real-world slavery or the Holocaust.

Really, this is getting a bit too political here...

They aren't people, they are androids. No matter how much they want to be a person that just isn't possible. However I don't think not being human is a valid excuse to oppress, abuse or enslave something.

He referenced history for hundred of years with flawed logic.

http://i.imgur.com/4LYny7n.gifv

Oh, nice edit m9

Like the evil of devaluing sentient beings on the basis of superficial differences?

If sentience, by itself doesn't grant rights and it's some rather arbitrary genetic thing... How many gene mutations does it take to loose em? 1, 2 to how many? Are we talking percentages, because then it can't be higher than around 5 percent or we start to need to grant rights to apes. If we clone a neanderthal or early human... can we enslave them legally?

And yes... I would equal machine feeling a holocaust (or anything), like a human would, ... like a human...

Sorry bud, I'm on Team Jacob. None of this Team Human nonsense.

I think you would be stuck, because if you are telling the institute that the androids deserve rights you are essentially saying that you side against them. You might not have any options about declaring them dangerous with the railroad, but hopefully you won't have to side with either of them and just leave that quest line unfinished.

I just want them to stop looking like us, fine okay whatever have your freedom. Let freedom ring, let freedom ring; but take off that fake flesh suit on your cold metalic face.

I hope the institute has a good enough reason for making creepy looking robots in the first place.

You simply dont grasp the basics. A mutation does not change ones humanity.
And one has never ever found 95% human 5% ape for it has never existed. All human remains found is 100% human DNA and all apes 100% ape. As for genetics, pigs is a better substitute for man. But one has never found 95% man and 5% pig creatures either.

Yes i know you would equal destroyed machines to the holocaust.

That is why i said evil indeed.

I just quoted a few of these replies to illustrate how some people allow their self-centered superiority to be stated as though it is factual when in fact it is anything but. In other words, humans are not superior to any entity we might create be it another human or an inorganic entity such as a machine (or a hybrid of both, of course).

Animistic cultures and their life philosophies such as Japanese Shinto, certain aspects of Buddhism and Native American beliefs refute the above quoted claims.

In addition, no one knows how human life is defined. What we do know so far is that it is not simply some type of "organic chemical soup" that leads to sentient life. We do not know what defines the "soul", either. Nor do most intelligent people wish to attempt to draw some arbitrary line as to how much of a human might be replaced by inorganic elements (e.g., pacemaker, artificial limbs, etc.) and once past that point the person suddenly loses their standing as "human" and instead becomes a "thing".

In fact, there is currently research into non-human forms of life. This is not restricted to organic life forms, either, as certain scholars have suggested that the problem with defining "life" leads to the possibility of defining life by ability to process information. In other words, in the latter case, such scholars have pointed out that computers would fit that definition of life. Not human life, of course, but life nonetheless.

How do you define life? Organic only? How about very simple entities such as the amoeba and a virus? What about various forms of microscopic entities? Where can you draw the line in a way that is not merely arbitrary or based on some personal "faith" (i.e., your belief system which is not shared by many other people)? Some scholars have also suggested that humans (and other organic entities that we tend to assume are "alive") are nothing more than biological/genetic programming. Likewise, some scholars have suggested that our perception of "reality" is nothing more than programming within a vast simulated realm.

It's much better to be cautious than assume that one has god-like omniscience and knows how life is defined (or not defined). We have no such knowledge and it does not appear that we will have such knowledge in the foreseeable future, if ever.

Any machine that follows it's programming whatever it may be (even pretend to be a human) is fine by me. But when a machine starts thinking it's human then it's time for it to take a dive into the metal grinder.

Seems to me this argument is doomed to being endlessly circular. And it's cuz of a fundamental difference in how 'humanity' is seen. Some people see it as a state of being, you simple are or you are not and others see it almost like a destination. Achievable regardless of where you begin.

So much garbage.

But i guess if you think machines are humans you lost all connection to reality.

And you know nothing of buddhism. Machines are not life in buddhism. But you probably get your ideas from manga or some such nonsense.

Enough mutations most certainly do, otherwise we wouldn't be here.

So what is the baseline for "human" and how different can you be?

As far as I know 95 percent of our genes are the same as a chimpanzees and we use pigs in medical research, not due to genetic similarity, but organ similarity.

None of this tho... explains why humans are "special" and should have rights. Remember, no mentioning of soul without proof of existence of soul.

Evil indeed? Yeah, because only good comes from feeling superior to others, without any evidence whatsoever....

...

And yes, I think humans are biological machines, just acting out their preprogrammed base instincts (feelings) around 90 percent of the time. Wholly unscientifically based on my observations of internet debating.

As far as you know....

That isnt very far. There is only 100% human DNA and 100% ape DNA. We never mutated from apes. As proof of every last bit of bone ever found. Either 100% man or 100% ape.

If you take the most mutated human in the whole world and hide 1 straw of hair among 100 of the most mutated ape hairs and send them all to a basic DNA lab they will without a problem find the human one.

You simply dont understand how DNA works.

A mutated human still comes up as 100% human in a DNA test because he is 100% human.

Think of DNA is a big box that you can see through. The box is the same for a pig or human. It is 95% of the mass. So 95% the same. Then the box has a core (the real value of DNA). This core is what shows the difference between a man and a pig.

This core, no matter how damaged it is, is either 100% man or 100% pig. The same is true for apes and men. And yes pigs box is slightly more like human box.

Or imagine it as atoms. A pig is atoms and so is a man. You send both to a bunch of school children asking which is pig and which is man.

Very easy to see which is which for they are vastly, vastly, vastly different. So the kids will instantly say human to the man and pig to the pig.

I'm completely lost on what's going on here. Can anyone fill me in?

Harkness isn't a human, this isn't disputed. He's an android who *thinks* he's a human. However my current good character lives off the philosophy of 'live and let live'. He's not trying to hurt anyone, so why should she try to hurt him? She isn't suffering any delusion that he's a flesh and blood human, but she just figures that so long as he doesn't try to hurt anyone, he could call himself whatever he wants.

I think this whole thread has gone off the deep end. If I performed the required facepalm for this I would blow out the back of my head.

It is also working as a guard protecting people so its a useful machine.

I sometimes let it be, but i do tell it the truth.

Zimmer does own his machine, that has malfunctioned, but alot of things get lost in the fallout world. Zimmer might also use the machine to hurt people or gain power. Unclear what his motives are. Maybe he will help alot of people.

Honestly, if an entity can't ask itself moral questions, feel pain, or just can't think about what it does, it's not a real problem to use as a slave or other things.

Well good thing as far as we know Androids can ask moral questions if they're starting to think slavery is a problem and they want to be free as slavery is a very immoral thing.

There is never an excuse for slavery, it's always a problem and the only RIGHT solution to solve it is freedom.

They can?!

Oh god I expect Bethesda to make some heroic main quest where you need to stop the evil top-hat dudes and free all the androids, and when you do, they shout ''SOLE SURVIVOR! YAAAY!''

Or you know something more realistic like a slave revolt akin to the kind that happened in various colonies and plantations during the colonial era of the Americas and the Caribbean.

Heh, I wouldn't be surprised if people start trying to free their smartphones from the evil slavers. That's pretty much the equivalent of it. If Bethesda forces me to "save" the androids and be the hero of the appliances, I'll never finish the main quest.