You completely missed my point. We are close to being able to create artificial biological life in a lab. What then when we can make fully artificial life and incorporate that into computers? That’s going to be a entirely human made artificial entity that has some processing and, maybe hopefully eventually, thinking capability.
Oh my god, this is the worst take I’ve read on these forums. And I doubt I will read a worse take unless someone unironically comes along and is in support of re-enacting slavery and/or taking human rights away from certain group of people. Someone might even argue that the word “human” doesn’t anymore apply to all humans and at that point @TheForumGameMaster’s opinions become even worse as they will be justified to be applied to real humans that someone no longer considers to be full humans. I get real strong subhuman treatment vibes here.
Well this wasn’t a good thread while it lasted. It started off really badly with @TheForumGameMaster wanting to normalize abusing human-like actors. Have we really gone so far from “games cause violence” to acting out an entirely realistic online bullying / abuse scenario (edit) not being a completely normal thing that certainly doesn’t lower the threshold of people to treat each other worse when those people do end up interacting with other humans?
And then this whole nothing artificial can attain sentience “debate” by a concerted effort by @50gens and @TheForumGameMaster to argue against everyone else for why enslaving sentient beings is okay, but somehow humans are special (appeal to nature fallacy and ignoring the fact that society is moving towards giving animals rights) was a real final nail in the coffin. Humans being special due to reasons will stop being a thing and then your entire argument falls apart, if something is according to pretty much all metrics we can measure now, as intelligent as a human. This gives a real nice round two of arbitrarily deciding that some human-like entities (some of which may be real biological humans) aren’t real humans with rights and instead need to be enslaved.
I probably should have closed this thread already but I was kind of hoping to see that people would stop just re-stating their opinions without actually considering the points raised against them as they were really hitting the fundamental underlying philosophical arguments against why it is ethically wrong to oppress sentient lifeforms (Sentientism - Wikipedia which applies to artificial life as well if they have sentience). Anyway this has now gone long enough so I will close this. Arguably I maybe shouldn’t have made this final post to air my underlying ethics grievances anymore, but I felt like I should point out this as the acceptable level of ethical consideration to start from when discussing ethical issues on these forums (if there’s ever a time when a discussion doesn’t get out of hand) and not revert back centuries in understanding of rights of humans, animals or any “individual who is capable of subjective experience” (edit: this quote is from that Sentiocentrism philosophy) that should be already considered to be a moral subject in general .