Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
WCDT Strips 3566 to 3570 (11th to 15th September 2017)
Tlaloc:
--- Quote from: Cornelius on 14 Sep 2017, 03:08 ---
--- Quote from: Tlaloc on 14 Sep 2017, 00:38 ---I had the impression that RoKo underestimated Bubbles because she did not expect the AI in a Human-AI partnership to take the lead, look at most examples we have and you have a fair argument that while AI have agency they're somewhat dependant to some degree on their people. They are all companions in some aspect, even Pintsize.
Bubbles breaks this trend, being quite autonomous and choosing the union with Faye because she wishes to.
--- End quote ---
On the other hand, you do have Corpse Witch, as an earlier entrepreneurial example, and Punchbot, as a CPA. Roko herself seems fairly independent. Now, of course, there is the fact, that she's only ever met Bubbles before she took her armour off, when Faye was standing up for her, and she was heavily limited by the CW's proverbial stick behind the door.
Part of this view might just be that we're fairly limited in the AI's we've met up to now.
--- End quote ---
I'm going to point out that I refer to a Human-AI partnership. Corpse Witch appeared to work alone or exclusively with other AI
Is it cold in here?:
>I think we need to first solve the issue of who is the legal owner of the chassis in question.
Answering a question about Momo's expensive new chassis, Jeph said AIs are the legal owners of the bodies they inhabit.
Nuclear submarines and space stations are likely exceptions.
If an AI establishes ownership by downloading, that would rule out some possibly useful business models like chassis leasing.
Tova:
One difference I can think of between health insurance for us meatbags and chassis insurance is that the level of insurance you'd need for a chassis would presumably depend on the value and complexity of the chassis that you have chosen for yourself. So in that sense, it is more similar to car insurance, but in terms of quality of life, it is more similar to health insurance.
The most comparable thing for humans I can think of would be prosthetic insurance. In both cases, the insured item is expensive and valuable, is a very personal item, and is critical for quality of life. The main difference is that prosthetic insurance has a smaller market.
So, I speculate that there would be private insurance options, and that government would offer financial assistance if you qualify for it and so long as you choice of chassis is not a luxury item and is reasonable value for money. In the US, I wouldn't be surprised if there were employer-provided chassis insurance for certain jobs.
shanejayell:
Awww WE think you sparkle, Bubbles! :-D
Cornelius:
--- Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 14 Sep 2017, 06:41 --->I think we need to first solve the issue of who is the legal owner of the chassis in question.
Answering a question about Momo's expensive new chassis, Jeph said AIs are the legal owners of the bodies they inhabit.
Nuclear submarines and space stations are likely exceptions.
If an AI establishes ownership by downloading, that would rule out some possibly useful business models like chassis leasing.
--- End quote ---
Personally, I know it's word of Jeph, but I think it might be problematic. There's a number of AI's we've seen passing by - some of them solely to threaten Pintsize after trolling them - that should, if not in active service, at least be disarmed. It makes sense to transfer ownership - in partial payment, I should think - up to a certain type of chassis. Also, suppose a fighter jet, or, to take a non-military example, space ship decides to settle in the low stress life of a toaster, what happens to the chassis they leave? Having it as their property might be seen as fair pay - but there's a point where that becomes disproportionate to the services rendered.
Usufruct, in some cases, seems a more likely option than downright ownership. But then, it would be useful to further explore the genesis of AI within the QC world, and how and where they are. For instance, are all (free) instances of AI necessarily embodied? If they could freely move over a network, that could make ownership of the chassis fairly difficult. I know, we haven't seen an example of that in story yet.
Come to think of it, there's a similar problem, if you will, as with the emancipation of slaves, with the one difference that in this case, the consciousness may in fact be separated from the body. And the added difficulty that in some cases, it literally may take the entire technical infrastructure of a company out. If we connect that with the issue of possible reparations for the time in bondage, there's also the issue of how to determine - again - the sentience of AI, and how they emerged.
Mind, I'm not arguing against the ownership of the chassis - I'm just pointing out how there might be issues and constraints related to that.
On an unrelated note, I wonder if Bubbles puts the paperwork somewhere Faye can access it as well, or if she just keeps it in her memory.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version