I had to do some side scrolling but thank you for the part 2 about transhumanism I requested. I take a more positive view of it though based on movement toward a Kardashev Type I society. I understand the point about "dying" at the hands of a.i. but right now they don't have actual malice and intent so I still consider cases such as Wanda Holbrook to be the result of human error. That isn't to say a general a.i. in 2018 couldn't be charged with manslaughter under some theoretical scenarios. I am sure some current general a.i. systems are capable of manslaughter when certain variables are open to interpretation by a neural network with no set boundaries but I don't think any prosecutor right now wants to be the first to take on such a case. Maybe in some way that makes a.i. judgment proof when it comes to criminal law at this time. What I am trying to get at probably seems weird to you so maybe I should expand upon it in my own blog post sometime soon.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from: