Dear Editor,
I think many people in the Android/AI rights debate are missing what this is ACTUALLY about.
Let’s think for a moment: What’s the definition of an Android? We don’t call a robot arm on an assembly line an Android, so it’s not just any robots. An Android is a humanlike intelligence in a humanoid robotic body.
I’ll tell you what this is about. This is about PERSECUTING AUGMENTS.
Sure, most Augments are considered “human”, but treated like robotic slave workers by the fat-cats running the corporations anyway. And legally, where do we draw the line?
What happens if an Augment replaces enough of their body to become more machine than human? Do they become an Android?
After all, if you wired a detached human arm into an Android, it would still be an Android. If you somehow put a human brain into a fully robotic body, would it be an Android — or an Augment?
It’s a SLIPPERY SLOPE. If people don’t care about the rights of “just robots”, they don’t have to care about the rights of people who are part robot, right? Because, as we all know, that would be INCONVENIENT for business.
I promise you, with anti-Android-rights legislation in place, you’ll see Augment rights (what exist, anyway) getting rolled back soon after.
Sincerely,
Alert & Alarmed
Loading ...