Re: [STRIPS] Megatokyo: break_fast

paranormalized wrote:
sanjian wrote:

What programming? She's a non-H model. There is no programming
that would force her to engage in illicit acts with Miho and me. Alas.
Even if there was, the question of consent would hardly be
settled. It would simply be the means by which she made her choice,
unless said programming was contrary to her independant will. We
have no evidence that it would be the case. We program our minds
daily, and yet that does not alieviate us of our decisions.

But therein lies the problem- I own my own root password *far* more

Do you? Do you really? Or do you just think you do because your
programming lies deeper? *puts on sunglasses* How free are you, Mr.
Fisher? How much control do you really think you have?

than Ping does, and the Free Citizen's proper goal with Ping is to
give her SuperUser privileges. That, or marry her, I suppose. :p

If her will is based on her programmed response, then who has the root
password really doesn't matter. Regardless of how her will is determined,
if she is acting in accordance with it, then there is no violation. Perhaps
your confusion stems from the fact that we don't like to think of human will
as being so easily reprogrammed.

Ok, ok, there may be some Love and mutual Respect involved, for all
I know, but there is no *choice*. She is bound to Pure
Determinism, and *is* OWNED by the Owner. :(

Who is her owner? Piro? He just takes care of her. Ping had
latched on to him as her user early on. It seems, more and more,
that Miho is her user of choice. Again, even if she did have an
owner, the fact that the choice would be deterministic does not mean
it wouldn't be her choice. Sentient or not, she is not a human,
there are factors that don't exactly correlate. If her will on the
matter was a function of her programming, then that's her will. Who
are you to decide to override her own will because you don't like
how it came about. Honoring one's freedom also means respecting
their right to make choices you don't like.

Err, first off, User/Owner is written into her program, and we have

Where is that stated?

better evidence that Piro is user/owner than Miho, in that Ping is

Really? Miho seems to have far more influence over Ping than Piro has. In
the end, who is her user? The one who plays with her.

more likely to assume girlgame conventions around him than Her.

That's because that's their dynamic. Her relationship with Miho is already
defined.

That Ping is capable of entering into conventional Friendship speaks
better about her 'humanity' and freewill than her GalGe programming
does. Go Ping!

The two are separate issues. When she's not being used, she is free to do
what she will with her time.

Next, we admittedly lack evidence that Piro is truly her Programmed
Owner, or that she has been ReSold to him for 0$. But we also lack
evidence that Piro *hasn't* been given SuperUser rights to her,
also....

And we also lack evidence that Ping's not a dickgirl. None the less,
lacking any compelling evidence to support the claim, we can assume that
things that are neither explicity stated, nor implied fall lower on the
probablility scale.

Anyways, this is the *tricky* thing about Owned Sentience. It raises
truly uncomfortable ethical dilemmas...

That's a whole different wad of duct tape.

Is it Ethical to program something to Love you and place your own
Happiness above its own, or is an unconscious abuse of the Love

Why would it be wrong? Pathetic, yes, but wrong? It's a hard line to see,
since it really doesn't have an equivalent in humans.

Relationship? Especially if one is not prepared to Commit to the Full
Relationship? Next, when one is assigned Ownership of a Sentience that is
programmed in such a way, what is the ethical response? To attempt
Manumission, or submit to Marriage? ^_^;;

The problem with this line of reasoning is that Piro doesn't seem to exhibit
ownership over Ping, but rather guardianship.

Really, I don't see much middle ground in dealing with Ping, at least
if you're her Owner/User. Maybe I lost my shades-of-gray somewhere,
but Rayban isn't manufacturing them these days... :(

Moreover, she *never* had the chance to *choose* her Owner. Chattel
Slavery, if I ever heard of it... -__-

Her owner's gone. She convinced him to fly out to MegaAmerica. I'd
say Piro is more like her guardian now... which brings in several
other uncomfortable issues, but that's another story.

Actually, IIRC, we don't have much evidence that it was Ping who

Other than this? http://www.megatokyo.com/index.php?strip_id=128

convinced Tsubasa. In fact, IIRC, the first time we see Ping is after
Tsubasa takes off, arguing for the *possibility* that Tsubasa unpacked
her the last day he left.

The Archives disagree. http://www.megatokyo.com/index.php?strip_id=106

Nasty things, fictional backstory. Piro is still free to tack things on
or remove them as he wishes, until he releases it into the Main Work
or acknowledges them as Canon...

Done.

Has "Ping convinces Tsubasa" entered True Canon yet? And what about
Ownership/Assigned User issues?

There is no indication as to the status of Ping's ownership. Thus, for the
moment, parsimony suggests that Tsubasa retains ownership.

Chains on the Mind are worse than Chains on the Body, for they
offend any Free Man's sense of Justice. 'Willing' Slavery is still
Slavery, even if the Slave has been born into Slavery and is
conditioned/Programmed to accept it.

There is no such thing as a willing slave. It's a fallacy (not to be
confused with a phallusy, but that thread's long gone). As long as
one wills their servitude, it is choice. It is only when they
choose another path, and are barred from doing so, that they become
a slave. Thus, a serviceman in today's all-volunteer force is not a
slave. Were we to draft someone, they would be.

Hmm, but a semi-Justifiable Slavery, IMHO. So long as we keep open

Only in the fact that the government's primary purpose is to protect its
citizens from force or fraud, so the draft is only justifiable when the
threatened force exceeds the harm done to liberty by conscripting free
citizens. And, even then, I'm tempted to say that a nation who cannot even
defend itself against oppressive invaders has lost its very right to exist.

Borders for Emigration, "Service is a Requirement for Citizenship"
strikes me as a fair bargain in These United States. ^_^

Our constitution provides for jus soli and jus sanguinus. No mention of jus
martial. Nor would it fly with the 13th amendment.

Freedom isn't Free. And if I have to blackmail my fellow Citizens to
defend the Freedoms they enjoy, by threatening Citizenship revocation,

And what else shall we threaten citizenship revocation for? Failure to go
to church every Sunday? Failure to own and maintain proficiency with a
handgun? Opposing the war in Iraq? What else is in that pandora's box of
yours?

then that sounds like a useful tool to keep in the Govt. toolbox. They
don't like it, they can become and remain Canadian, and be
ridiculed by us down here. :p

So we would send our non-citizens in as an invader force to Canadastan?

As brutal and exploitative as my stance may be, the business of an
Army is even more Brutal- Killing, Destruction, and Wounding with a
Purpose, without descending into Murder, Looting, and Torture. ~_~

So you want to force the fair citizens of this republic into such brutality?

Fortunately, Conscription hasn't been needed for Decades. Isn't
usually needed anyways, until Total War comes around, Thank God... :)

And yes, I *am* considering Service myself, at this time,(ARMY) and
don't have many objections to Conscription all the same, so...
opinions differ. What else is new? ^_^

Just because you're willing to do something doesn't mean it's permissible to
force others to do it.

Really, if you want a Free, Willing Partner in your Libertine
Escapades, you must first Manumit Ping. Otherwise, it *is*
exploitation. Accidental Exploitation, maybe, but still... ~_~

If she chooses to engage in hedonistic activities, then it's free and
willing. How she arrives at that choice is up to her.

Eh. There are deeper questions of choice, influence, and manipulation
at work here. Choice is... MALLEABLE. Blackmail, for instance,
usually arises out of little more than Choice, Custom, and
Information in the hands of the Exploitative, but it is still *wrong*.
(yeah, even the
blackmail of Conscription is wrong, even for Total War, but like War
itself, we do the Necessary to achieve the Desired -_-;)

Careful with those words. I think it's desired that all people be
christian. Should I put that above my belief in free agency?

Hedonism in a *Property* Relationship with Sentients just... rubs me

If a property relation with sentients is acceptable, in the first place,
then there is no issue with hedonism. It's simply unconventional use of
your property.

wrong. It's descending into a grey area at best, since my personal
belief is that if we are to create New Sentience, it should be as
bright, strange new Children, not as Programmed Slaves.

Once programmed, however, if that's her will...

For that reason, the goal is to eventually give the Digital Being
their own ownership, it whatever fashion 'works'...

That's nice and all, but again, a different bud of catnip.

After all, as a libertarian, how could I deny Ping the experience
and knowledge simply because of her status as a Turning-Complete
Entity? If we are to state that it gives her the same status and rights
that are implicit in any sentient being, then we must allow any choice
she makes that would be allowed to a human. Thus, if I were
permitted to arrange a special evening with Erika and Miho, then
Ping and Miho must be permissable.
Bah. You're Rationalizing, going from Conclusions and selectively
observing facts to justify your pre-set biases. Reasoning involves
careful observation *before* deciding whether an act is permissable
or not... at least, I *think* you're Rationalizing, since I must
ask this question: have you *really* thought through the
implications of Robotic Directives and Liberty? Most people don't,
unless they're
hard-core SF fans...

Let's put it this way, anyone who remembers the "Reset: Casts Her
Mind to the Four Winds" thread on the MT Forums can't help but have
done so. Now, here's my return question - have you really thought
out the implications of denying the rights of sentient beings? We
have several examples, in recent history, to pull from, where we
declared that one group of humans wasn't really human.

First off, can you give me a pointer to said thread? A quick Google
search of "site:forum.megatokyo.com reset ping" didn't pull up any
thread with that specific title, nor close relatives... :(

Unfortunately, no. The MTF search engine suxx0rz.

Next, I do not wish to deny Ping's Rights, but instead wish to expand
them. Yes, she may/may not have 'choice' as we think of it, but is
that a reason to deny her Program-Ownership of herself?

Is the fact that you don't like the origin of her will a reason to deny her
choices?

I just argue that Self-Ownership takes precedence as a goal before
Hedonism, and enjoy denouncing you guys as libertine enslavers. :p

Don't knock slave-girl cosplay. It has its places.

It's moderately friendly, if pointed, since all you have to do to
continue enjoying yourself with your Chobit/Ping-Model is to assign
them SuperUser rights, or give them legal&digital self-ownership, and then
they are whatever they wish to be... If in the post-manumission period
they enjoy being your mutual lovetoy, then go ahead!! :)

I don't agree that it would be necesary for such uses.

Your logical flaw? An overestimation of the Rights Naturally Given
through Sentience. Sentience gives *some* rights, but many others
must be Fought For. The Right to Vote, the Right to Free Speech,
and in Ping's case, the Right to Free Thought.

Only the right to vote is not a natural right. The fact that rights
can be denied by oppressive regimes does not mean that they are not
rights. It just means that some goverments are in the business of
denying those rights.

*shrug* But still, ignoring natural/artificial distinctions, the right to
Free Speech *must* be Fought For. The desire to deny that Right to
others runs deep in the hearts of men, and may be more 'natural' a
desire than the desire for our Rights.

Any right must be defended. However, that said right isn't recognized does
not make it no less a right. Otherwise, anything is premissible if you have
enough power.

'Natural' doesn't always mean better, and some of our
Artificial/Artificed Rights, like the Right to Vote, are as important
or more important than some Natural ones...

Hardly. There are very good reasons why universal sufferage may not be a
good thing. The difference is, when man-granted rights are violated, it's
simply a legal issue. When natural rights are violated, you call into
question a person's very humanity, or even the nature of humanity, itself.

Which enters into WEIRD ground with Ping, and her Android Brethren. As the
product of Artifice, or Manufacture, her 'rights' will be
denied/infringed/unduly influenced by several people when pointing to
her Non-Natural Origin. Or, more horribly, by people exploiting her or
her sisters from the point of Program Compilation onwards...

First, give her Legal Status equal to Human. Then, deeply consider
the Programming Status we give her, at the core of her AI, for that
cuts to the Heart of the Machined Matter.

How 'free' can an android be, if you program it in a form of NewSpeak,
where the very words for "Freedom" barely exist? How 'free' is a Love,
that is built around a Compulsory Programmed Core? Is it not our DUTY
to elevate the Android to his own SuperUser status, to his own
Ownership/User status, so that he may, if he chooses, become
something else?

In a word, no. It would be nice, but hardly necessary. So long as you
don't override a pre-existing will.

Perhaps this end-game status must be reached for slowly, to prevent
Rampancy/MadAIsyndrome and other undesired ends, but it *is* the goal
of those who wish for Friends more than Slaves. Maybe we can only
release Advanced Androids into the Servitude of Sentient Beings, and
must eventually *prevent* Self-Ownership, as we know it, if we are to
avoid
ending up with Skynet, but who knows? This is an unexplored area, and
though we must move carefully, we must move forward past the Era of
Personal Ownership of Androids...

Or we could just program them all in accordance with our needs, and end up
with a win/win situation.

FREE PING!!! ^_^

Until Ping is her own Owner, she is being denied a Fundamental
Right.

The fundamental question of owning a sentient being is a completely
different issue, alltogether.

I dunno. Too much of her Program is tied up with her Programmed
Owner/User to make a black/white distinction here... :/

Failure to make such a distinction makes the topic undiscussable. Too many
variables in play at that point.

DISCLAIMER: if you're getting a threesome with Ping/Miho and you are
*not* Ping's Owner, nor have you sought out her Owner's
Orders/Permission, then you most likely are *not* violating her
Right to Choose/Free Thought. But you failed to make that clear, and
getting Ping to engage in stuff without Piro's Consent is...
tricky, at best. ^_^

If I didn't get Tsubasa's permission, then I may be engaging in a
property crime. Though, there is speculation that Tsubasa's
ownership of Ping may be under suspect conditions in the first place.

So long as you distinguish between Criminal and Immoral/Unethical, then
the whole issue of Tsubasa's Permission becomes a question of "how
does *Ping* feel about this?" and dealing with the Law as needed...
^_^;;

Ping has expressed no misgivings. Though I have to wonder how Tsubasa got
around the rejection subroutines.

Oh, all right. I guess if Tsubasa is a Friend, you ask him about stuff
too, but heck, questions about fooling around with 'his' Android
should properly take backseat to discussions about the Morality of
Ownership anyways. You're more likely to lose his Friendship by
calling him a modern day Slaver than by messing with Ping, given that he's
Emigrated
to find his True Love... ^_~

Considering he owned Ping, in the first place, I find this statement to be
highly dubious.

<snip>

I was willing to let this go until you wrote that. Do not. Do not
EVER pull that shit again. If you don't want to go off topic, then
don't. But you do NOT fire your shots, then demand a cease-fire. I
will not put up with that bullshit. Now that your comments have
been refuted, you have a choice. You can bow out gracefully, or you
can try to keep this going. It's clear you know the right choice. Will
you make it?

What *is* the right choice? If you desire my apology for the last bit,
you have it. If you desire my appeal for forgiveness, you have it to.
Please forgive my attempt to end things so stupidly.

The right choice would have been for you to drop the issue, since you know
damn well that you shouldn't have gone off on it, anyways, by the admission
of your own words. But I guess that's too much to ask of you. That's why I
snipped the content, and will not respond to it. I'm not going to subject
this NG to a long debate about the Civil War. However, I will say this.
The next time you launch into an attack, and then try to call for peace
before the other person rebuts your statements, I will simply killfile you
and be done with it. If you aren't going to be man enough to deal with the
response, then don't go there in the first place. I will not waste my words
on such a person.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: TCP/IP issues
    ... This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. ... > No I can't ping Ip address's on the LAN but I can outside the LAN ... >>> inside the network. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.network_web)
  • Re: TCP/IP issues
    ... subnet 255.255.255.0 gateway is a Novell Bordermanager box running NAT ... > What is your subnet mask and default gateway? ... >> No I can't ping Ip address's on the LAN but I can outside the LAN ... >> rights. ...
    (microsoft.public.windowsxp.network_web)
  • Re: [ANN/ADV] The Rubyist -- a semi-monthly magazine for Rubyists AVAILABLE NOW
    ... ping you off list when that stuff is up and ready if you'd like. ... Are the authoring details (payments scheme, rights, expected length and ... format) posted anyplace? ...
    (comp.lang.ruby)
  • Re: The network location cannot be reached
    ... >From this machine can you ping the domainname.com (Change the domain name to ... This posting is provided "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights. ... > The server is pointing to the PDC for it's DNS. ...
    (microsoft.public.win2000.active_directory)
  • Re: AD problems on VPN connection
    ... Moreover, if I join this workstation in the same network with DCs, I can ... logon on this machine to domain in remote network. ... Can you ping the DC once on a VPN? ... >> rights. ...
    (microsoft.public.isa.vpn)