It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Would this type of robot be considered as "living"?

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 28 2010 @ 09:32 AM
link   
There can be a bunch of male and female robots. The female can hold the information of how to have a child and the man can hold the port to download the information. The connect and the man receives the information and make the child. It's sort of like robotic sex. Their energy source would be vegetation. The will be programmed to get "hungry" when they are running out of fuel and then they will look for fruits/vegetables and refuel. So if we made a It also has an urge to learn so that it can grow and develop. Now if 3 generations passed and then they were living like any other animal, would you consider this as living?




posted on Nov, 28 2010 @ 10:21 AM
link   
No
This is already demonstrated actually in the game called The Sims (3).

The bot people have urges, mate, have offspring, their programming is passed on and even mixed with those they mate with. They have sophisticated algorithms that make them hungry, sleepy, need to dispose of waste, etc etc etc...its a life simulation.
if you step away from the computer for several days letting it run on high speed, you could come back to a 10th generation full town from the initials.
From a simply philosophical argument, you could easily make a very strong argument of how they are just as much a lifeform as we are...their universe and concept of reality, the digital realm that is created (they think they are naturally evolved of course...silly sims..but some of them wonder if there is a great creator in the sky)...and of course we are their deity behind the scenes, either slightly encouraging direction, or taking a very direct influence.

However, the mechanics...well, we know this is at its root, simply a set of complex equasions firing off at certain event handlers to create a specific action...

No matter how complex the programming, a pure robot will never be "alive"...now, you can make the argument that people are in fact not alive but rather biological robots...that is certainly open for consideration...and you will not get a good answer on that without someone bringing in some intangeable aspect like soul or god...because at face value, humans, or anything else, does act like little more than a bio-robot.

Our ego believes we are more...however...even our ego has been programmed in passively.



posted on Nov, 28 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 


I think they would count as living, at least by my standards. We're just biological machines ourselves, only we weren't built at our current state of complexity we evolved that way, if we could build robots that actually eat and go through many chemical processes analogous to life I think they should count as living, at least in some sense. It would be especially cool to develop a population of robots that could evolve physically over though it'd be difficult.

I hold a lot of opinions about future technology, for instance I think one day there will be a Clone Civil Rights movement, and perhaps one for sentient robots as well.



posted on Nov, 28 2010 @ 11:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by arpgme
 


I think they would count as living, at least by my standards. We're just biological machines ourselves, only we weren't built at our current state of complexity we evolved that way, if we could build robots that actually eat and go through many chemical processes analogous to life I think they should count as living, at least in some sense. It would be especially cool to develop a population of robots that could evolve physically over though it'd be difficult.

I hold a lot of opinions about future technology, for instance I think one day there will be a Clone Civil Rights movement, and perhaps one for sentient robots as well.


I can program a robot to tell me it is alive...that does not mean it is alive
I can program a robot to build a robot just like itself, that does not mean it is reproducing
etc.

an advanced program is not a lifeform...however, a lifeform -may- be just an advanced program...however, since we do not know our creator, and by all measures, it appears we are naturally formed from mud and muck and a few billion years of slow natural evolution, we as lifeforms are indeed special and different than a simple mechanical biological program.

I simply cannot accept a toaster to be equal to me in regards to life.

Now, I do see a day when complex artificial intelligence is so advanced that the line will simply be indistinguishable...and I see a race of robots that would, in my opinion, deserve 99% of rights that their human creators enjoy, however that final 1% (be it right to vote perhaps, or something uniquely human that ultimately has the "hand on the plug") should be reserved to biological entities.



posted on Nov, 28 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Well, what if the robot is also biological? What if we make the robot with cells and stuff? So, it can eat, reproduce, learn, have its own intentions, feel, and grow old and die. How is that not a life form?



posted on Nov, 28 2010 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Well, what if the robot is also biological? What if we make the robot with cells and stuff? So, it can eat, reproduce, learn, have its own intentions, feel, and grow old and die. How is that not a life form?


Thats different...thats genetic engineering...then arguably sure.



new topics

top topics
 
2

log in

join