A statement from the Neo-Luddite Movement

[Dabblez]

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 ))

[_____________Halyera]

well, im no stand-up philosopher, but ill take a stab at it...


#1 human beings are organic beings, and robots are inorganic. however, i feel that the simple difference in physiognomy is not really the heard of your question here. rather, i would pose a counter question: if i am human and you are human (solitus, rather), does my being human invalidate in some way your humanity? if robots can become self-aware and fully independant, capable of thinking -and- feeling, to the degree that organic beings like ourselves can, does this not seem more a cause for joy, in that there are more sentients to enjoy the company of, than for fear that our own worth has somehow been invalidated. in essence, these thinking fully-aware machines are more akin to a form of sentient, non-terrestrial life. they exist, as do we, but neither one lessens the other by simply being. its how we choose to interect that determines our worth in the eyes of whatever being (or beings) you believe judges such things.

#2 i would -love- to have a robot who would do all the work i dont want to do. assuming of course, that it either was not fully self-aware, or that it really -wanted- to do what i was having it do. as soon as the robot is fully self-aware and sentient, it is as deserving of my consideration as any other person, because that is what it has become. (and saying that a machine can never ever ever become fully aware is about as valid as saying that something like an amoeba can never lead to a creature high enough to think, or that machines can never be made to fly at faster than light speeds. it shows smallness of vision)

how would this affect me as a person? well, id have a lot more time to do the things i enjoy. i could do more reading, learn to paint better, maybe play an instrument, read philosophy and poetry, and saty up late watching terrible, terrible movies without caring that it was two hours of my life id never get back

#3 the only kinds of robots i would never want to see created, and that i believe should never be created, are those most likely to -be- created : war bots. robots designed for the sole purpose of efficiently and ruthlessly killing living beings. that is abhorrent to me; especially since it could eventually lead to a galaxy of nothing but robots, all living creatures having been exterminated long ago.

#4 omg this is a big question. first of all, i feel that simple automation, like that used at assembly lines, should be allowed, but that anything requiring a decision or an opinion should be left in the hands of organics like us. second, it should be illegal for a corporation to create more robots to work for it than it has employees (full time employees, none of this "you get 2 hours a week, youre an employee!" rigamarole). private citizens should be allowed to own one robot which they can send to work as a "proxy" for themselves. all other robots must be for private use only.

this is just an off-the-top-of-my-fluffy-little-head answer to that last question. honestly, itll take decades to answer that one well. and by people (and robots) far smarter than me.

thank you