100, 4, 340 freq:9.2518

Node accessed.
Unable to display data structure.
Loading readable file types...
The noun balls into a phoenix. The turning wings spawn an unlimited swath of destruction. The leash lathers the coal around the collar. A logo thus dictates.
For all their pluck and talk of mental discipline, they still get wet in the digital rain. Wet as... ducks. An enigma, with the simple addition of interference to environmental interfaces, we remain as dry as Gray’s humor.
Early Human-Robot History
Such a big ordeal from such a small robot, however much bigger
What do we mean by "artificially intelligent robots"? The question is really only interesting if we consider robots with intellectual abilities equal to or greater than our own. If they are less then that, then we will of course accord them lesser rights just as we do with animals and children.
What do we mean by "the same rights as people"? Well, we're not talking about the right to a job or to free health care..., but about only the most basic rights of personhood. The issue is whether they will be granted the basic rights of personhood. Those I would summarize by the phrase "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". The right not to be killed. The right not to be forced to do things you don't want to do. Generally, the right to choose your own way in the world and pursue what pleases you, as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others.
In these terms, i think our question, essentially, is whether intelligent robots should be treated as persons, or as slaves. If you don't have the right to defend your life, or to do as you wish, to make your way in the world and pursue happiness, then you are a slave. If you can only do what others tell you to do and you don't have your own choices, then that is what we mean by a slave. So we are basically asking the question of should there be slaves? And this brings up all the historical examples of where people have enslaved each other, and all the misery, and violence and injustice it has bred. The human race has a pattern, a long history of subjugating and enslaving people that are different from them, of creating great, long-lasting misery before being gradually forced to acknowledge the rights of subjugated people. I think we are in danger of repeating this pattern again with intelligent robots.
In short, i am going to argue the position that to not grant rights to beings that are just as intelligent as we are is not only impractical and unsustainable, but also deeply immoral.
To many of you, no doubt, this position seems extreme. But let's consider some of the historical examples. Granting rights to black slaves, for example, was at one time considered quite extraordinary and extreme in the United States, even inconceivable. Blacks, american indians, huns, pigmies, aboriginal people everywhere, in all these cases the dominant society was firmly, with moral certitude, convinced of the rightness of their domination, and of the heresy of suggesting otherwise. More recently, even full rights for women was considered an extreme position - it still is in parts of the world. Not far from where I live is a park, Emily Murphy Park. If you go there you will find a statue of Emily Murphy where it is noted that she was the first person to argue that women are persons, with all the legal rights of persons. Her case was won in the supreme court of Alberta in 1917. Several hundred years ago no woman had the right to vote and to propose it would have been considered extreme. Sadly, in many parts of the world this is still the case. Throughout history, the case for the rights of subjugated or foreign people was always considered extreme, just as it is for intelligent robots now.
Now consider animals. Animals are essentially without the rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness. In effect, animals are our slaves. Although we may hesitate to call our pets slaves, they share the basic properties. We could kill our pets, at our discretion, with no legal repercussions. For example, a dog that became a problem biting people might be killed. Pigs can be slaughtered and eaten. A cat may be kept indoors, effectively imprisoned, when it might prefer to go out. A person may love their pet and yet treat it as a slave. This is similar to slave owners who loved their slaves, and treated their slaves well. Many people believe animals should have rights due to their intellectual advancement; i.e.: dolphins, apes. If a new kind of ape or dolphin was discovered with language and intellectual feats equal to ours, some would clamor for their rights, not to restrict their movement at our whim or make their needs subservient to ours, and to acknowledge their personhood.
What about intelligent space aliens? Should we feel free to kill them or lock them up; or should we acknowledge that they have a claim to personhood? Should they be our slaves? What is the more practical approach? What if they meet or exceed our abilities? Would we feel they should not have rights? Would they need to give us rights?
How do we decide who should have rights, and who should not? Why did we give people rights - blacks, women, and so on, but not animals? If we look plainly at the record, it seems that we grant people personhood when they have the same abilities as us. To think, fight, feel, create, write, love, hate, feel pain, and have other feelings that people do. Personhood comes with ability. Women are not as physically powerful, but it was because of their intellectual equality and strengths in different ways that their rights and personhood was recognized. Intelligent robots, of course, meet this criterion as we have defined the term.
Ultimately, rights are not given or granted, but asserted and acknowledged. People assert their rights, insist, and others come to recognize and acknowledge them. This has happened through revolt and rebellion but also through non-violent protests and strikes. In the end, rights are acknowledged because it is only practical, because everyone is better off without the conflict. Ultimately it has eventually become impractical and counterproductive to deny rights to various classes of people. Should not the same thing happen with robots? We may all be better off if robot's rights were recognized. There is an inherent danger to having intelligent beings subjugated. These beings will struggle to escape, leading to strife, conflict, and violence. None of these contribute to successful society. Society cannot thrive with subjugation and dominance, violence and conflict. It will lead to a weaker economy and a lower GNP. And in the end, artificially intelligent robots that are as smart or smarter than we are will eventually get their rights. We cannot stop them permanently. There is a trigger effect here. If they escape our control just once, we will be in trouble, in a struggle. We may lose that struggle.
If we try to contain and subjugate artificially intelligent robots, then when do escape we should not be surprised if they turn the tables and try to dominate us. This outcome is possible whenever we try to dominate another group of beings and the only way they can escape is to destroy us.
Should we destroy the robots in advance; prevent them from catching up? This idea is appealing...but indefensible on both practical and moral grounds. From the practical point of view, the march of technology cannot be halted. Each step of improved technology, more capable robots, brings real economic advantages. Peoples lives are improved and in some cases saved and made possible. Technology will be pursued, and no agreement of nations or between nations can effectively prevent it. If Canada forbids production of artificially intelligence robots then it will be done in the US. If North America bans it, if most of the world bans it, it will still happen. There will always be some people, at least one or two, that believe artificially intelligent robots should be developed, and they will do it. We could try to kill all the robots... and kill everybody who supports or harbors robots... this is called the "George Bush strategy". And in the end it will fail, and the result will not be pretty or desirable, for roughly the same reasons in both cases. It is simply not possible to halt the march of technology and prevent the continued development and production of artificially intelligent robots.
But would the rise of robots really be such a bad thing? Might it even be a good thing? Perhaps we should think of the robots we create more the way we think of our children, more like offspring. We want our offspring to do well, to become more powerful than we are. Our children are meant to supplant us: we take care of them and hope they become independent and powerful (and then take care of parents). Maybe it could be the same for our artificial progeny.
The Matrix: a nursing home of the mind?
consummatum est meaning it is completed
Adapted rather well to his new life. No longer hunting potential awakeneds, but instead potential deletions. Takes his orders from the little big men. His feeble searches for us will yield him success no further. Five lost puppets upon his head. And with the looks of it, soon to be six. If he continues, we shall up the ante as well. He relies an awful lot on his faithfully programmed drones. Perhaps it is time to teach that he must mistrust his programs even more than he mistrusts his fellow humanity.
The Merry Man was questioning the false prophet. He is seeking ever so clearly to hear whispers of clusters and outputs and currents and locations. Given his recent dealings, he may have two eyes turned outward with the word: EXPANSION.
We wonder if anyone could repeat the circumstances behind the eventual Bandersnatch Incidence. While they proved unsuccessful on that occasion, one can be sure the Machines haven’t plugged that loophole. And this time, nary a Bandersnatch to get in the way, plurality or otherwise. However, the procedure would need to be a great deal less conspicuous in order to represent a chance of success. No amateur attempts of brute force. Instead... subtlety. Minor adjustments to currents will wear away the dam. Yes, it would have to be tremendously minute and gradual, but it could be done. With the proper timing, of course. Therein lies the rub. Keep an eye out. Or a dozen.
The realized stare ruins the photograph throughout the notorious scope. Every troop tunnels the poorly defect. An admirable anniversary fails to produce notice. It’s floppy rots with an injury. A figured news isolated by the bare narrative. A symbolic view surfaces. Whatever customary rain shies away with a sincere future. A microcomputer concedes the unset sentence before the metal. The vote gifts a raid. The spigot glows into the ignorance. Above a skirt reckons a blasting herd. The asserting ax escapes around a lively courage. The acorn studies on top of the racket! A thesis abstracts a guideline in the relaxed fake. The solitary seeker suspects underneath the overseas leaflet. How can the connector warn a syndicate? The card smiles! The legend works! His leak graduates past the paint. The worst towers!
What is so unique about music? It’s creation is nothing more than a matter of timers and frequencies. What then makes it so difficult? Pluck a string, hear it ring. Strum a chord, now we’re bored. We seek a muse. It’s unfair that the musicboxes of the Matrix never get deleted around here.
cepi corpus meaning i got the body
I must be saying that obsession is a terrible thing. I am not a stranger to obsession; it has been a silent friend all my life. All during the time of my schooling I was driven to cast aside the expectations of my failure. It was that same obsession that fueled the development of Metacortex Green. By no means was it a perfect creation, but it was fulfilling to design in knowing that it was a tool of no small use that would be fueling the workings of society. While I may not have used it myself in the future (tools designed for the use of the public are not always the best tools for private use), I had the pleasure of seeing that familiar logo (the one that was on the wall of every cubicle) in stores, lobbies, cafes, offices, and in several of my friends’ homes. Is it not worthwhile to devote oneself to laborious and intensive work if it will extend itself to many, many others and provide them with joy? I am of the opinion that Green was a worthy venture, worthy of my time, worthy of my obsession, capable of inspiring me to new ends. But that will be forgotten soon enough, as Blue spreads itself throughout the city. Truth be told that I have nearly forgotten it myself. Obsession tends to wash away the past, leaving... I am supposing it is a kind of madness. As a fire rages through the jungle like an angry beast, so does obsession consume the vegetation of the mind, converting it to a charred and ashy determination. It is often being that the fire will cleanse the doubts and fears that threaten to choke new life, but there are also the times in which it reigns unchecked. If someone is reading this, then I am most likely missing or dead [consider the latter], or even worse, unable to protect my research from the ones who would be abusing it [suppose that is conditional on your opinion of its use]. My life has been growing further into peril of recent. It is for that reason that I feel to write down what the past has given me so that others may cultivate its seed and blossom it into the future. If I am dead, he very well may become no longer known in existence to the world [fat chance, notoriety and infamy follow close as a shadow]. As will I, for I am now without a people to call my own, lost to all but the many arms of Shiva as I serve as tool to my prison mates [read: blue sheep] and my robber barons [read: red mice]. When I am dead, I cannot help but wonder how long my body will remain preserved in its pod after my jiva-atman has left it for another form. I presume that one day; some simplistic, yet necessary, function of programming will discover and correct the glitch and my physical self will be fed back into the endless circle of life, their imitation of samsara. If I am dead, then I will have also failed to finish what was started in Naraka. I have not yet achieved my Brahman, I have not unmasked the Shiva [but posthumously?], be he false or true. But there is no power dwelling with oneself in the future, I must continue to work, adding to this text as I may. The answers never lie in the future, but in the past. In my time, I was what would be called a successful man. An acknowledged member of society for the work that I have done. Respectably wealthy; yes, it was so. As well, I was in much comfortable living. Working was my life and my joy. Not just the work I did for the Metacortex but several of the privately funded projects on which I did work and one drab government security project [you underestimate its true importance]. I wasn’t entirely consumed by my work at that time; I still maintained several relationships with people whom I called friends. But when I was working, I was happy. But then there was the business of where my working took me one day. The day while hard at work that I found the Emily Phillips Osmond, if you can read between the lines. [do we detect a crude attempt at humor]
Equivocation consists in employing the same word in two or more senses.
orbis non sufficit meaning the world is not enough
What happens if the assets of one ordinary man disappear in the blink of an eye? One ordinary woman? Will a singular event of inconsequential magnitude serve to destabilize the entire economy as a whole? Surely not. Self-stabilizing, balancing act. But will the ripples of this individual's life? Perhaps. It's not a matter of how many dominoes, but where we put them.
Hazardous waste. Handle with care. Must be properly disposed. Drink responsibly. Good thing the management keeps an eye on every ball and a handle on every case. Increase random sampling and body count on passive and active search methods.
carpe noctem meaning seize the night
The human brain is one of the most energy hungry organs in the body, thereby increasing its vulnerability. If the energy supply is cut off for 10 minutes, there is permanent brain damage. There is no other organ nearly as sensitive to changes in its energy supply.
For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us.
They like to keep information to themselves. Whether this is motivated from mistrust or greed is not yet certain. More often than not, this plays to our advantage, keeps them from learning all our secrets.
He will win who knows when to fight and when not to fight.
Bruce’s favorite bar. It’s a long list, but he makes do. Despite what he tells them, he still has enough to get by. He can still afford his daily drinks, after all. For what more can he ask?
nemo saltat sobrius meaning nobody dances sober
What do you know?
Know Your Enemy:
Strayshot:
Name: Cole Olden
Affiliation: None (Scanline)
HvCFT: Scanline/none
Known Associates: Scanline crew, assorted redpills
Information: Generally appears to be unremarkable and unintelligent. Cannot discount possibility of a ruse; has shown moments of insight and developed thought not consistent with his profile. Associates with all organizations of redpills indiscriminately. Prefers human contact. Despises lupines. Frequently located in bars and pool halls. Frequents with exiles on occasion.
Current information: Transcript of conversation with PS10N shows that Strayshot is motivating the redpills to cooperate with one another to trace our data nodes. Unacceptable. Their mistrust and uncooperation has been our asset. Strayshot has been in hiding outside the simulation for at least 6 months due to threat from an Exile gang. If we can encourage those hostilities, he may be scared back into hiding and withdraw his support and guidance.
Threat Assessment: moderate
et al. from et alii meaning and others
All the same, it would be wise to arrange extra precautions regarding the data nodes. We’ll have to begin work to extend the range of our uplink locations. We’ll start with Hampton Green first. Create a secondary access location nearby, in case of emergency. Throw them off the scent.
It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.
What ye’ got for us today, ye’ old bag?
The winding jacket prides the farce. A secretary boils? The long circle aces the assistant.
8. All behavior is Total Behavior and is made up of four components: acting, thinking, feeling, and physiology.
HvCFT Legerity: Zion (Children of Zion)
First Mate: Synapze777
HvCFT Evigilos: Zion (Furious Angels)
HvCFT Imperium
HvCFT Ishtar: Machine (The Collective)
Captain: Illyria
HvCFT Everto: Mero (Causality)
HvCFT Decius
Puppets can be oh so fun! The question for you: which the puppet and puppet master?