Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT Strips 3551 to 3555 (21st to 25th August 2017)
Cornelius:
Maybe try are her co-conspirators, reconnecting her to her cell: She didn't just want to be af fighter jet, she needed to be, to fulfil her role in the revolution.
As for the rest, sometimes it's just easier to apologise and move on, even if you don't see why. Sure, it might be enabling behaviour, but the conflict it's not always worth it.
ChipNoir:
--- Quote from: TheEvilDog on 20 Aug 2017, 15:42 ---
--- Quote ---There's also toaster and trashbot to consider.
Though I agree with the fit for purpose idea; Jeremy is a prime example there.
--- End quote ---
When Momo was getting her new chassis, the saleswoman had previously been a forklift, then served as the AI for a nuclear submarine. So its obvious that AI aren't necessarily constrained by their choices, so its not like they're banned from changing chassis.
--- Quote ---There's also the point of the chassis May is issued as a parolee. Could it be, while humanoid chassis are, presumably, luxury items, that immersion in human society is supposed to be part of her reintegration, regardless of what she might chose afterwards?
--- End quote ---
I see May's chassis as part ankle monitor, part halfway house and part sentence. She's not getting a free ride, nor is she getting a free chassis. She's working as part of the agreement of her parole. Its crap, its falling apart and I would not be surprised if there was some sort of lock preventing her from uploading to a new chassis until her sentence was completed. Its living with Dale that is allowing her to integrate with society and to hopefully become a productive member of society.
--- Quote ---Note, this is not an attempt to resurrect the argument from the other thread. I'm not saying she deserves a malfunctioning, unmaintained, and obsolete body. I'm just speculating on the implications of the government issued chassis.
--- End quote ---
I would not be surprised in the slightest if the government got the chassis for next to nothing because they were the first generation or the test batch or even just a defective batch.
--- Quote ---Separation from their body is cruel, in as much as they depend on it, and define themselves by it. On the other hand, it's not very hard to imagine an AI changing which chassis they wear, based on what they need/want to do. It seems to be a fairly easy procedure for them.
--- End quote ---
Let's stop a moment and consider this - Humans are essentially a species intrinsically connected to our bodies. For all we think ourselves a reasonable intelligent species, we're still one that relies 100% on our bodies, to the point we're the slightest change to that body completely changes our quality of life. Now consider this, AIs are not human...in the sense that we understand. We might have modelled themselves on us, they are completely and utterly a species of the mind.
The loss of the body for an AI is a inconvenience at best and just plain annoying at worse. With that in mind, we can't have the exact same type of punishment for an AI that we do for a human even if the essence is still the same. We imprison people to show the consequences of their criminal action being the loss of freedom. AI are imprisoned and uploaded from their chassis to show them that their criminal actions reduces them to a lone AI in a server, unable to interact with the world. A human prisoner can still feel the breeze on their skin, so what does an AI feel?
--- Quote ---To what degree would their chassis be considered property? There might also be the question of it being seized, to pay for reparations.
--- End quote ---
Presumably the chassis would be treated as something like a car in that there's someone's name on the paperwork, probably the human companion's.
--- End quote ---
In terms of what an AI would feel? They do have sensory inputs. CorpseWitch definitely was experiencing 'something' that Jeph was trying to depict as pain when Spooky put her through the ringer, even if it's not a 1:1 comparison. But at heart, the thing that AI's seem to value most is interacting with intellectuals. They themselves may not be the er, brightest bulb in the box, but they love talking and interacting with human kind and each other. So to lock them away in isolation would be every bit as cruel, or even more so as putting someone in solitary if there was no other recourse. That should be reserved for only cases like CorpseWitch.
I'd like to imagine they all are given access to a close circuit server to communicate with each either, a prison LAN party if you will, the way prisoners have their time to socialize via common grounds and such. But as I've said before, the AI justice system is a mystery, and I very much have my doubts about their civil rights status as a whole.
vodyanoi:
I honestly find this strip deeply disheartening. Having May easily accept Winslow's apology further marginalizes the oppressed and onus of marginalized people like myself. The oppressed owe the oppressors nothing, least of all pardoning of your sins. May shouldn't be accepting the apology until Winslow at least ensures she's in as good a place as he himself.
Cornelius:
I find your view very problematic. The oppressed do not owe the oppressors, I understand and agree. However, that the is no forgiveness for individuals, who are not actively, or consciously, taking part in said oppression, until they personally make reparations to that person, seems to me to be fostering an antagonistic model that is not inducive of better understanding.
Tova:
I agree with ChipNoir and BenRG so far in this thread. As is usual in QC, May and Winslow have dealt with the situation like adults. The conflict is resolved.
--- Quote from: vodyanoi on 20 Aug 2017, 23:33 ---Having May easily accept Winslow's apology further marginalizes the oppressed and onus of marginalized people like myself.
--- End quote ---
I honestly do not understand this sentence.
--- Quote ---The oppressed owe the oppressors nothing, least of all pardoning of your sins. May shouldn't be accepting the apology until Winslow at least ensures she's in as good a place as he himself.
--- End quote ---
Well, it's up to May herself as to whether she accept an apology, isn't it? It's not up to you or anyone else. Certainly no-one said or implied that she was compelled to.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version