Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCT: 2216-2220 (25-29 June 2012) Weekly Comic Discussion Thread
jwhouk:
So - Is Jeph just trolling us or what?
Yes. 1 (2.5%)
Yes, definitely. 1 (2.5%)
Of course. 4 (10%)
Damn right he is. 12 (30%)
Well, maybe not. Maybe it's Cristi who wrote that newspost? 1 (2.5%)
No, it was ALL Jeph. 0 (0%)
C'mon, like he actually READS anything on here? 3 (7.5%)
Maybe sometimes we are a tad too eager to pair people up. 6 (15%)
I prefer Yellow Mellow ? ? ? 1 (2.5%)
Oh great, a new meme. 1 (2.5%)
NOTHING IS BETTER THAN SPACE HAM! 2 (5%)
...except WAFFLES! Mmm, Waffles. 2 (5%)
Faye's REALLY gotta work on her aim. 6 (15%)
Total Members Voted: 40
DSL:
--- Quote from: Redball on 26 Jun 2012, 18:44 ---
--- Quote from: DSL on 26 Jun 2012, 16:48 ---I *did* find myself wondering what Momo would have had to say about this situation. As a being who is intensely aware of the state of AI rights, she might protest. Then again, it is Pintsize.
--- End quote ---
OK, I get some understanding of AI rights, but I'm not sure about AI responsibilities. Momo seems responsible. But Pintsize? What kind of rights would he have in a human-AI community? He seems far more dependent on Marten than Momo on Marigold.
--- End quote ---
British law has, or had, a concept that summed it up beautifully: "Diminished Responsibility." In other words, the majesty of the law is saying, "This 'un is allowed to run around loose, but bears watchin'. Lock up the silver and your daughters."
Redball:
I think the same principle applies in the U.S. I associate the phrase as following the wrongful act, maybe with a diminished sentence.
DSL:
Yeah, I just read a little bit on it ... seems to be essentially the same as the YewEss' "not guilty by reason of insanity." Just the choice of words seemed to me to indicate a person's overall legal status, not simply affecting one verdict.
When I'm wrong, I'm wrong in interesting ways.
Yarin:
New comic up
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version