The Neo-Luddite Movement has been actively seeking ways to bring an end to the unchecked proliferation of all thinking machines, robots in particular. The methods we have used in this struggle have not always been entirely legal. For that we make no apology.
People often view the Luddites as desperate fanatics, terrorists or simple nut-cases. Before you dismiss the Neo-Luddite cause so lightly, I invite you to ponder on the following questions. Has society really addressed them?
Question #1:
If in the future machines have the ability to reason, be self-aware and have feelings, then what makes a human being a human being, and a robot a robot?
Question #2:
If you could have a robot that would do any task you like, a companion to do all the work that you'd prefer not to, would you? And if so, how do you think this might affect you as a person?
Question #3:
Are there any kinds of robots that shouldn't be created? Or that you wouldn't want to see created? Why?
Question #4:
Automation and the development of new technologies like robotics is viewed by most people as inevitable. But many workers who lose their jobs consider this business practice unfair. Do you think the development of new technologies, and their implementation, is inevitable? What, if anything, should we as a society do for those people who lose their jobs?
Jethro Towne
Neo-Luddite Movement
(( /ooc Questions on the ethics of robots shamelessly plundered from www.thetec.org ))