Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
What is the social/ethical/legal status of AnthroPCs?
mustang6172:
Momo has to pay Marigold back for her chassis, so that means Momo owns the hardware (or will after a few easy payments of something).
GarandMarine:
Maybe that's a more unique case of self ownership? Cause that was Momo's choice, and I've always had the impression that she was a bit on the forefront of AI rights and how she perceives herself in society.
bhtooefr:
Also, I've said it before, but I think there's been some retconning re: AI rights. They were pretty clearly property at first, especially when the casemodded AI was shown.
Is it cold in here?:
Jeph said somewhere that AnthroPCs own the hardware in which they live, which raises some questions about Station.
Mtmerrick raises a good point, made even better by the fact that AnthroPCs of different brands have different personalities.
Kixie:
So, the Singularity did happen at one point, and it's stated in that comic that they (The AI of the QC universe) could enslave us, or remove our presence from the planet entirely.
This drastically affected the social/ethical/legal status of AnthroPCs in the way of a constitutional amendment granting them equal rights as humans. (Edit: Though, this only affects the AnthroPCs in the U.S. unless in the QC universe, all countries are centrally governed)
I believe Is it cold in here? was referring to this tumblr post (Ctrl-F "legal owner" .. it's about halfway down). Regardless of who purchases the hardware, the AI owns it. Therefore, Momo is paying back Marigold on moral code (Pardon the pun, couldn't find a way around it) alone.
So, they are effectively sentient robots that own their software and hardware, that share the same inalienable rights as humans, and apparently have the technology that could possibly "kill all humans" (as Bender would be apt to say) without a second subroutine processed.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version