If we could create one, should an AI have the same rights as a human?

If it was proven sentient, I think the answer is yes. I would want an Asimov-like governor on it that prevented it from taking over!

I saw I-Robot. Scary.

Apply this logic to the abortion argument. We can create real life. But when do humans get these rights?

I am pro-choice in this one but it makes for an interesting discussion nonetheless.

If we can prove that the ai is unique in some way, yes

What kinds of rights?

Mm. Well, equal legal representation, the right to live, the right to free expression, the right to information and education, the right to work at whatever they chose, etc

It might make sense to ask them what they want, first.

We should ask why are we trying to create AI

I’m with Marina. I don’t really see any difference between creating a sentient robot and creating a baby, except the robot would be a lot smarter and more useful.

I’m scared to answer this question. Every side I take and every reason I come up with for taking that side just leads to an inner argument as to why the other side could be right. Scary!...

OMG!!! I thought you were asking about guys named Al!!!

If the robot is smart enough to lawyer up and take it’s case to court we might be in trouble. How much money the robots have could affect the outcome also, they could buy their rights.

I’m not even sure Robin Williams should have the same rights as everyone else. He is unpredictable and needs to be controled.

No. It should have the same rights as a computer.

A computer, however, is not an intelligent, conscious being.

I know some people who wouldn’t qualify then.

a sentient being should be given human rights. Jeff Hawkins – On Intelligence seems to indicate that intelligent machines won’t actually care about their rights. he states that the only reason we care is because our lower functions areas of our brain make us care (i.e. the “lizard brain”), and no one will build a computer with a lizard brain.

If they have emotions: yes. Otherwise, probably not.

Animals have emotions, and their rights are quite limited.

@btko – I’m not saying that’s the way it should be :)

Though that’s an interesting question: we don’t know how intelligent this AI is. Perhaps it has emotions and is as intelligent as an animal: what would we do?

Well, the whole question of intelligence is a sticky issue of course. Recent attempts to quantify it in the US, with the No Child Left Behind Act, have failed miserably (but that’s something for another day). So let’s just say that the machine has simply passed the Turing test, and can hold a conversation with a human, without the human being able to tell it is a robot.

Well, would the robot itself mind not having the same rights? If the robot doesn’t care, then I don’t either :)

I don’t know about that Vincentt. I’m thinking again about animals, they have no concept of rights, but they may very well be deserving of them. Likewise, if we look at a mentally disabled person… they could have no concept of right either.

In general, even a human with zero intelligence has the same rights as me, having super intelligence. ;p

I don’t see how intelligence can play a roll in the proclamation of rights. Good topic :)

Do animals have emotions?

Like anything, it’s debatable.

But here is a good article outlining current thinking.

Likewise:
A 2007 study in Canada found that fish have their own separate personalities.

If it/he/she could comprehend the value of life, absolutely. If it/he/she could love, without a doubt.
Logic ain’t everything.

I think animals can comprehend the “value of life”, or at least their lives, pretty well. Also, “love” is a pretty loosely defined term. Who’s to say whether an AI could “love” or not?

Also, I’m not really sure how logic not being everything connects to the rest of your post. Could you clarify?

@knotmyday the value of a life can be easily calculated. ask an actuary. would a machine that is able to put a dollar figure by my name, or it’s name, qualify?

@Hobbes, an animal’s instinct for survival hardly qualifies. Call me when the chimps codify an ethos. A machine can be programmed to survive at any cost, and even to ensure the survival of others; but if it cannot comprehend why it is performing these actions, ‘tis only a machine.

@the good doctor: you appear to be assuming that actuaries are human… ;^D

A computer can tell you why a sunset on a particular day is composed of so many vibrant colors- cloud formations, air currents, atmospheric refraction, airborne particulate matter etc. It can give you a logical, mathematical conclusion, based on available data.
No doubt it can be pre-programmed to say that it is “beautiful”, and relate the pre-programmed respose with no stirring of awareness, feeling, emotion or belief.
“Love” may be a nearly undefinable term, but you, no doubt, have felt it and been “in” it. No doubt you love your iBook, but does it love you back? Survey says…

“but if it cannot comprehend why it is performing these actions, ‘tis only a machine.”

I argue, that we as humans hardly know “why” we perform the actions we do.

Are you referring to the cognitive process, involuntary reflex, emotion, or…?
I know exactly why I ordered the taco I ate for lunch- I chose (from a multitude of options) to patronize the taco shop because it is close to work and I haven’t much time today, I was hungry, and I find tacos both aesthetically pleasing and delicious.
I even went so far as to commemorate the momentous event with a poem, tentatively entitled In Taco Veritas:

O taco, thy spicy heart and wondrous smell
Embraced (appropriately) with crunchy golden shell;
None can spurn thy precious feast!
My mouth a temple, my tongue a priest,
I worship thee, my culinary jewel,
As I transform thy beauty into metabolic fuel.

Copyright 2008, all rights reserved, yadda yadda yadda.

I hope that answers your question.

That, Knotmyday, is gold.

Haha, great answer.

I’m sure chimps would choose tacos too if so presented.