I reiterate that Roko needs to to root/jailbreak her body. Is it possible that the list of words her new body gave her in the dream (4115) are the required password(s)? Only, she doesn't remember the dream.
other (please specify)
When I lived in Madison and could easily get rhubarb from the farmers market during the spring, I'd make some really great strawberry-rhubarb jam.I had considered rhubarb as an option, but I wasn't sure how common rhubarb or strawberry rhubarb jams were.
Where I'm living now, the closest farmers market doesn't open until the end of June for some reason...
Raspberry.
[snip]
More drama -> longer WCDT's.
It's the nature of the beast.
More drama -> longer WCDT's.
It's the nature of the beast.
Ten years ago ten pages was a busy week and five pages was a quiet one. Over ten we'd be watching for trouble...
Lemon & lime marmalade; could never stand the bitter, rindy taste of the orange stuff.
How in the name of sanity am I the only one who voted for Grape Jelly?????
How in the name of sanity am I the only one who voted for Grape Jelly?????
I feel you, turns out I'm the only one who voted for plum jam.Not any more! One vote for plum jam and one for the sadly omitted raspberry.
How in the name of sanity am I the only one who voted for Grape Jelly?????Nobody's voted for jalapeno jelly either.
I feel you, turns out I'm the only one who voted for plum jam.Not any more! One vote for plum jam and one for the sadly omitted raspberry.
Such as fully sapient AI feeling like they're being treated as products rather than people.
What I'm hearing is that I should just change "other" to raspberry instead of resetting the poll and adding it.
Such as fully sapient AI feeling like they're being treated as products rather than people.
Firmware like that makes you feel treated like an idiot by default. Also, you might think hazard protection firmware like this could be turned off either by the occupying sentience or by an authorised technician.
I'm wondering whether Roko did read the user manual and then went to Union Robotics, or just went there without further consideration.
And, for everyone wondering about the face washing episode: the footer text reveals Oopsie Guard would've stopped her from actually doing damage with the peeler.
Wow! Roko is really under stress here! Running everywhere, shouting (at Bubbles, something that normally I doubt that she'd dare to do) and playing with her hair in panel 4. I do think she's attempting to outrun a serious breakdown here!
It's interesting that Bubbles knows about OopsieGuard but Roko doesn't. I'm guessing that this is no great secret or even slightly a secret. I suspect that Roko has just been avoiding reading her documentation on the grounds that, on a subconscious level, it would mean admitting that she's in that body now and has to know how it works.
Still, it's a weird kind of funny that, for all her distress, Roko can still debate philosophical points!
So, who is that head from? It looks like a Pintsize model AnthroPC chassis!
I feel like she really ought to have been told about this feature before purchase.
I feel like she really ought to have been told about this feature before purchase.
I feel like she really ought to have been told about this feature before purchase.
I'm kinda wondering if this was added after Roko's attempts at self harm.
I'm kinda wondering if this was added after Roko's attempts at self harm.Sounds like one of those ideas which would have to be prefaced by the sentence "I'm going to do what's called a pro gamer move"
I'm kinda wondering if this was added after Roko's attempts at self harm.Sounds like one of those ideas which would have to be prefaced by the sentence "I'm going to do what's called a pro gamer move"
"I'm going to take this person who is suffering breakdowns over the sensation of her body not belonging to her... and reduce her control over said body."
So, who is that head from? It looks like a Pintsize model AnthroPC chassis!And why is it's mouth hanging over Faye's hand?
So, who is that head from? It looks like a Pintsize model AnthroPC chassis!And why is it's mouth hanging over Faye's hand?
It's not a paradox. It's just that now BUBBLES is stopping you from punching the wall instead of your body stopping you. Isn't that better on an existential level, Roko?
So, who is that head from? It looks like a Pintsize model AnthroPC chassis!And why is it's mouth hanging over Faye's hand?
It's a whip antenna
Regarding the homemade jellies, jams, and other preserves in the OP, my mom made a bunch of those when I was growing up too. Mayhaw, dewberry, and fig were the ones I recall. Definitely in the "other" category.Quoteother (please specify)
Raspberry.
I'm kinda surprised it looks like they're hacking Roko via a smartphone or tablet. That's some weak security, or it's a specialized device..."A little bit of knowhow goes a long way."
I'm kinda surprised it looks like they're hacking Roko via a smartphone or tablet. That's some weak security, or it's a specialized device...Or, you know, Roko gave them the relevant admin passwords or codes so that they could sort out her problem. This is not an adversarial situation here.
As for the firmware taking caution against self-harm, we humans have that too. It’s called reflex, instinct, flinching and fear. Have you ever been unable to jump down from a height? Or unable to down some strong drink? Unable to muster the courage to do it? That’s your “firmware” trying to save you from self-harm. Nothing creepy about it.
As for the firmware taking caution against self-harm, we humans have that too. It’s called reflex, instinct, flinching and fear. Have you ever been unable to jump down from a height? Or unable to down some strong drink? Unable to muster the courage to do it? That’s your “firmware” trying to save you from self-harm. Nothing creepy about it.There's still the distinction between innate vs foisted upon. QC A.I. minds work similar to humans' afterall.
I'm kinda surprised it looks like they're hacking Roko via a smartphone or tablet. That's some weak security, or it's a specialized device...Or, you know, Roko gave them the relevant admin passwords or codes so that they could sort out her problem. This is not an adversarial situation here.
Is is just me, or has Bubbles gotten even hotter since the last big arc she was in? Narrower waist and neck for starters...
I'm not complaining, mind you. Hotness has nothing to do with height...
Yeah, Jeph definitely seems to have tweaked Bubbles' appearance a bit, including drawing her not quite as extraordinarily tall as he used to. I realize that her height has been somewhat inconsistent throughout the comic anyway, but still it seems to be a little shorter than in the beginning.Makes it easier for Faye to hang on her likes she's doing in panel 2.
The wording of the pop-up seems to suggest that the warranty will only be partially voided - self-inflicted damage will no longer be covered. Are we to assume that the warranty still holds as regards other kinds of damage?
That's mighty nice of the company - most just allow the warranty to void out if you change settings like that.The wording of the pop-up seems to suggest that the warranty will only be partially voided - self-inflicted damage will no longer be covered. Are we to assume that the warranty still holds as regards other kinds of damage?
I'm sure the usual "defects in materials and workmanship" clauses still apply
That's mighty nice of the company - most just allow the warranty to void out if you change settings like that.The wording of the pop-up seems to suggest that the warranty will only be partially voided - self-inflicted damage will no longer be covered. Are we to assume that the warranty still holds as regards other kinds of damage?
I'm sure the usual "defects in materials and workmanship" clauses still apply
Given that the device whose settings Bubbles was altering is sentient, there is a real unbreakable security measure.No, it's not? I mean, it's Roko who is sentient, not her body.
Given that the device whose settings Bubbles was altering is sentient, there is a real unbreakable security measure.
No, it's not? I mean, it's Roko who is sentient, not her body.
Isn't this whole arc being about her acting under user rights, with with built-in routines overriding her commands to the body?Given that the device whose settings Bubbles was altering is sentient, there is a real unbreakable security measure.
No, it's not? I mean, it's Roko who is sentient, not her body.
But she is in situ all the time. It's hard to hack when the administrator shares the same input/output ports.
If Roko had been born with it like we are or had even consented to its installation, I think she'd accept it a lot better. Or if it had simply pulled her punch without the condescending message.
As I said on Reddit, yeah, it would be actually worse. A ton worse. "Subtle hijack of control without notification is the worst way of enforcing EULA that can be imagined. If I can't do something I want to do, at least I deserve being informed why and how." I believe it's qualify for gaslighting.If Roko had been born with it like we are or had even consented to its installation, I think she'd accept it a lot better. Or if it had simply pulled her punch without the condescending message.
That’s interesting, actually. It would be much creepier without the huge popup message. We can’t say this for sure about AI psychology, but if it’s similar to a human’s, then she would probably have remained unaware of the feature, and told herself that her failure to follow through was her own self-preservation instinct, or even an active decision.
Is is just me, or has Bubbles gotten even hotter since the last big arc she was in? Narrower waist and neck for starters...
I'm not complaining, mind you. Hotness has nothing to do with height...
Bubbles, you should at least charge for your time...
Anyway. That was cute.
Has anyone else hugged Roko, yet, in her new chassis?
It feels like I missed something, but I know I haven’t. Did Roko reconsider her request after reading the manual or go through with it?Going by the text of the last popup, she went through with it.
It feels like I missed something, but I know I haven’t. Did Roko reconsider her request after reading the manual or go through with it?I really think that, when Roko would actually look into manual, we would know without any doubt. I don't think that OopsiGuard warranty is the only surprise.
Going by the text of the last popup, she went through with it.Wasn't it about "I'm useless" invective ?
There are, though explicit notification of separability within a contract usually overrides any other jurisdictions default laws.That's mighty nice of the company - most just allow the warranty to void out if you change settings like that.The wording of the pop-up seems to suggest that the warranty will only be partially voided - self-inflicted damage will no longer be covered. Are we to assume that the warranty still holds as regards other kinds of damage?
I'm sure the usual "defects in materials and workmanship" clauses still apply
As I recall, there are laws about that. For instance, if one modifies the suspension on a new car, it won't invalidate the power-train, though the dealership might try to pull that trick (I've heard about a lot of BS like that happening).
Has anyone else hugged Roko, yet, in her new chassis?Yes she has, for several thousand strips, and desperately since the crushing incident.
(I think maybe Melon, but that sort of "fling! desperate grab!" isn't nearly as relaxing as being embraced by a gentle Mama Bear.)
I think she's been needing one.
I'm disappointed the poll doesn't have my favorite, muscadine. Also, no mayhaw or pepper jelly.*ahem*
Roko just kind of taking over the office is funny. Heh.I've had similar experiences to this. It's not an intentional power play. It's a side effect of enthusiasm and working out the solutions to a problem faster than the other people in the room.
May is not allowed to rent out processor time. It's not exactly a hard jump to think she wouldn't be allowed back into anything resembling finance, or that requires security clearance. I wouldn't be surprised if being a companion AI has a "no felons allowed" clause in their hiring requirements. What work, precisely, are you thinking she can do with the chibi or iPad style bodies, or disembodied and running on a server? And yet, she is required to be gainfully employed.
Welcome, interesting new person!
If May's parole is analogous to typical conditions for parole in our world, she's required to find lawful employment. Yes, she could live in a server farm somewhere, but we don't know whether any way of making a living there is open to her. I would have to stretch my mind hard to figure out what jobs someone could do in a Pintsize-style chassis, the other low-cost option.
If it's like our world, a lot of variations on earning a living are explicitly forbidden. Common parole conditions forbid self-employment or working for relatives.
The traditional suit of clothes upon release is a tempting analogy. As you point out, a good humanoid body is much more expensive than that. A low-spec secondhand one, refurbed with a warranty, might be quite a bit more affordable. Say it was in the $4,000 range, like an eight year old Ford Fiesta. Still hard for taxpayers to swallow, but she could be given an installment plan to pay for part of it.
The system did see a need to issue her some kind of body. Might as well be one in working order. Especially since the goal at this point should be to reintegrate her into society if she will hold up her end, rather than continuing punishment past the end of her sentence.
You're missing the reason why May wanted a body. She wanted to be with Dale, evidently the first person who treated her as a friend and acted as if she could potentially be worth anything, attitude problem or not. This isn't a decision that she made on cold logic or cynicism. She wanted to be with her new friend who had treated her kindly and not as a runaway appliance.
May be metal, plastic and digital code but she's still a fully self-aware person with all the flaws and vulnerabilities. That includes the fact that prison was evidently an enormously traumatic experience for her. So, no, she couldn't 'just' do an alternative to get a body. The price, in terms of her mental and emotional health, would have been too high.
I think quite honestly May is better off than the vast majority of human ex-convicts who commit crimes of similar severity, if for no other reason than the human equivalent (ill health) is way more crippling!
New to this forum, but am I the only person that thinks May really isn't entitled to a better body?As a zero, I should notice that we don't actually know what's constitute robotic rights in QC universe. But, I think, we can assume that spirit of UDHR applies. Of course, UDHR is, actually, good wishes: they're ideal, with no real country I know endorsing it in full. I think it's Article 25 of UDHR: "Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control." So in my argumentation I'm going to presume that UDHR spirit is really applies. Also I'd say it's safe to assume that parole system for AIs is essentially the same thing as parole system for humans (at least, author himself was researching parole laws for humans when creating May situation, and no reason exists for us to believe otherwise). Of course, it's absolutely possible it isn't the case (after all, at least some AIs were considered and treated as property of humans), but then we have nothing to found reasonings on.
...
They're just exploring the logic of the situation.
But that's not what Roko needs to work on at this point. She needs to raise enough of a stink that the simplest thing for the bureaucrats to do, their easiest action, is to replace May's body with a better one. This offers two arcs with interesting possibilities (pre and post replacement), especially the definition of better.
If May were swapped into a new earth-moving machine that had somehow lost it's built-in AI, would that be "better"? Probably not from a story-telling perspective. What about Crushbot? Even Crushbot was a useful AI in society, whatever his current desire to be different than he is. Maybe May and Crushbot should swap chassis??!??
In that suit, Roko certainly looks like the boss.I'm disappointed the poll doesn't have my favorite, muscadine. Also, no mayhaw or pepper jelly.*ahem*
[Points at the "jalapeńo jelly" option that nobody's voted for yet].
Pepper jelly is up there.
1) AIs do not absolutely need bodies. They don't need one to exist. Lots of AI don't have them, and have jobs. Since an AI doesn't grow old, they don't have a finite lifespan to earn one. They are also not helpless like babies or young children, and hence do not generally need charity. They have no particular needs other then maintenance and power.In May's case there's a psychological need. Due to robot prison she's developed claustrophobia and in general appears to have developed a trauma around the idea of being disembodied. All in all it seems reasonable to assume that for May's mental health it's necessary that she has a physical presence in the world.
2) Large chassis are not cheap. Momo and Winslow had to be bought theirs, and their partners have implied they are not cheap (Marigold had to budget for a while, and Hannelore is super rich). Bubbles and Roko earned theirs as part of their jobs.I don't think that May should get her body for free. However what I do believe would be more beneficial for every party involved is if she got a proper, functional chassis which she could then use to pay the government back over a series of instalments. In one of your later posts you do some theoretical calculations on how much repairs would cost and how long it would take for May to earn the money to buy a better chassis. The problem there is that the comic has already established (I believe it was Roko who said it (https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=4023)) that as it stands repairs and power are actually taking up all the money May earns. Given that she literally has had both an arm and a leg fall off we could argue that repairs and maintenance are actually costing her more than she's earning, especially since Faye and Bubbles are probably already trying their best to minimize the amount of money that May has to pay.
3) May is legitimately a criminal, and hers was not a crime of necessity or desperation. As a matter of fact, her crime was specifically trying to hijack a body - a dangerous fighter jet. May is not especially sorry for committing her crime, and has generally expressed that she would be extremely happy if she had succeeded. In short, she is only sorry she got caught. I am all for rehabilitative prison, but May is not exactly rehabilitated. Punitive prison is a legitimate social issue that applies here, but honestly the parole system (or equivalent) has not particularly failed her.I believe we've been interpreting May's character differently. There was that one comic where she explained that IF she hadn't gotten caught she probably would've been enjoying herself immensely. However in that same comic she also explained that, having BEEN caught, she's probably a better person now than she was before or if she had gotten away with it. Reading May's character I get the impression she is genuinely trying her best to be an upright member of society this time around, and as it stands the main thing that's making it difficult for her to not return to being a criminal is her horrible chassis.
4) May has the option of a smaller, cheaper but fully functional AnthroPC chassis, like Pintsize. If she cannot afford one (perhaps she isn't allowed to sell or trade in her cruddy current one) that should be her primary goal. It would largely eliminate her maintenance costs and likely lower her power costs enormously.If her probation requires her to hold a job she needs to have a chassis which can be used for work. As pointed out above May's probation bars her from doing any digital work and those miniature chassises don't look like they're very suitable for physical labour. It might be feasible to stick her in some industrial chassis but so far that doesn't seem to have come up in the discussion. Maybe industrial chassies are just as bad as being disembodied when it comes to feeling claustrophobic and shut off from the outside world. Especially since, given how industrial machines are generally very dangerous, such a chassis would most likely have to be bolted to the ground which DEFINITELY would trigger May's trauma.
One thing is the the comic never explains how much a chassis costs, other than that it is not cheap. Let's say one is $5000. If this is the case, her repairs can't be that expensive. Her leg falling off is caused by a faulty five dollar part. Sure, labor is not cheap, but why would her maintenance eat up her entire salary? Let's say she earns minimum wage. At 7.25 an hour (federal minimum), and a 40 hours work week, she would earn $290 a week. If she is paying Faye $290 a week to maintain her body, the problem is that in 18 weeks (4.5 months) she will have paid more than a new one would cost. On the other hand, if she chose to be disembodied for that time, she would now have enough to BUY a new body. Now if a new body costs way more than $5000, I have to ask: do you think a government should be handing out a way more than $5000 gift to a new parolee?
the government employee explicitly says that disembodied AI ex-convicts usually do not choose to be embodied. This means that May's situation is directly a result of her own choices - hers is "a niche case of a niche case". And with respect, I cannot imagine that many of the jobs that human ex-convicts do cannot be done by a disembodied AI, such as all kinds of industrial work, some service positions, etc.
The idea of "service positions" jarred loose that May could do things like call center work from a server farm, if the terms of her parole permit it. May would be a lousy customer service rep, but it's not up to the taxpayers to make up for that.I believe it would qualify as digital work, which is directly and expressively forbidden for her by probation rules.
There is also the curious case of Pintsize, who after damaging his motherboard with cake batter ended up with a military prototype chassis (https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=147) by mistake.It was before Singularity and AI Equal Rights amendment.
Sorry... all I can read into the posts above is... "How dare May want to have a body!"
Well, about "she didn't want to do any harm, she just is a thief", I'd like to mention that stealing is bad. She isn't really violent, that's true. Still, stealing is, generally, something that makes a person quite not a very good person, [snip]
Even more important! According to Roko (her again) May isn't just blocked from renting out processing time but from any and all forms of digital work during her probation period. I imagine that just makes being disembodied flat out impossible if she's also supposed to hold a job during her probation period.
This storyline is as much about Roko as it is about May. Characters in stories tend to play a specific role or embody specific concepts. That doesn't mean that they're one-dimensional but it does mean that storylines in which they play a significant role tend to include that role or that concept. In the case of Roko her concept appears to be the meaning of justice, including when justice stops being justice and becomes unwarranted cruelty. There's also the thing about her having difficulty adjusting to her new body but it's shown that when her own issues aren't hindering her she'll immediately charge back into trying to help bring some proper justice into the world.
Perhaps a rent-to-own program for chassis for offenders (since they cannot get loans)?
Gentlemen, we're debating in a vacuum.
New to this forum, but am I the only person that thinks May really isn't entitled to a better body?I'll just quote this, because pretty much everything else you've posted works very well and demonstrates your point very effectively.
But Jeph said once that Ais are the legal owners of the body they are in, which would rule out renting unless there are exceptions.Even though it's word of Jeph, I still contend that that's a problematic principle. And one might even argue from that position, that the department of corrections is not liable for maintenance, or replacement. And buying it back might be complex.
Not to mention the fact that if the fighter jet was damaged in her taking it for herself, she's have to pay for those damages as well.As far as I remember, she was caught before she even got near buying it, in the transfer of funds.
But Jeph said once that Ais are the legal owners of the body they are in, which would rule out renting unless there are exceptions.Come to think of it, it isn't impossible to imagine that May's body might represent the value of the hardware she previously lived in.
Jeph said once that Ais are the legal owners of the body they are in, which would rule out renting unless there are exceptions.
Look, let's say I have a psychological need to have a car, and let's say my circumstances require me to have a car to work. It's not a real thing, but neither is an AI having a psychological need for a body, so work with me here. The state won't give me a car just because I have a need for one - American government doesn't even entitle a person to medicine. What the comic is advocating is giving me a car if, and only if, I first am a parolee.And yes, I'd say that if a state released you from the prison on the condition of you living in Willamina, Oregon (two thousands of population) (because, hey, they want you to live in governmental-approved location to ensure you're not middling with substance abusers; yes, it's frequent condition), and demands you to meet your parole officer at least twice per week in Portlend, Oregon (about 55 miles), and demands you to find a non-digital job in a sphere you don't have any experience and education for (and, let's face it, you can't just get a decent job or take a loan), and this job should be approved by your parole officer... well, I'd say giving you a car is a decent thing. And no, I'd not advise your friend to get a chassis under such conditions.
Do you not see the inconsistency in this? If I was friend with an AI in serious financial difficulties with this condition, and they started giving out chassis to parolees, would I start advising my friend, "How do you feel committing a mild felony?"
I don't think so. She was looked at by a couple of decent professionals, including Bubbles and tech man in a shop, and nobody ever says something like this. And people who are working with hardware is quite sensitive to such things, IRL and in QC (you can remember that literally everybody with a grain of experience just identify Pintsize's highly classified military hardware at a first glance, including Marygold!).Jeph said once that Ais are the legal owners of the body they are in, which would rule out renting unless there are exceptions.
This raises an interesting possibility: May's current chassis is a junker but, just maybe, is it also a classic? There are people on-line who pay many multiples of their practical value for old and obsolete equipment (even of fairly recent vintage) to enshrine it in a museum, personal or public. Might someone be willing to pay many multiples of the value of May's chassis to do the same? All they need to do is pay for a replacement instead of directly paying to take immediate possession!
Edited to clarify: the question is a paraphrase, and not intended to open the question of May's contribution to society. Whatever she did, and does now, contribute, is generally, by the kind of people that ask the question, regarded as being negated by her crime, even if she is doing her time, and the funds were recuperated.1. I'm not balance type of guy. It's not, in my opinion, a thing about "how good she done, and how bad she done". Her having a really golden heart (very) deep inside - which is possibly a thing here - doesn't mean she shouldn't be lawfully punished for her crime, under the due process requirements.
To point 3: if in fact, an AI is legal owner of the hardware it runs on (word of Jeph), that would mean there is hardware for her to return to.With all due respect to author vision, I can't accept it as a legal rule. I mean, I perfectly agree that AI can be the owners, and that social consensus tends to at least respect AI "sitting rights", but every time we are shown purchasing a chassis, it's always a human being buying it. I can't imagine a can of worms about automatical translating of ownership just because a person happened "jump in". What I believe exists is right of possession (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_possession) on the body.
2. Again, I'd like to notice that beggars can't be choosers in parole system. If there is a lot of AIs who are allowed to be disembodied and to work, it's good for them; that doesn't mean such an option exists for May, and, by the way, bureaucrat never said this! Reread him: he never suggests May refuse a body and became disembodied, staying on parole (and also he is rude on the point of lawsuit - he offended a citizen at least twice, calling her incompetent and stupid). Existence of other cases can be a reason for parole conditions changing hearing, but, well, it costs money (that May haven't), and it means more attention to her life with a threat of return to jail (that May is afraid). What he IS saying is that "hey, it's rare and insignificant case, that's why she'll have a bad body", not "hey, your client can nicely exist without a body at all". And, again, his own job existence means that it happens often enough. Essentially, rule of thumb: when a government worker (or, well, any worker) saying you that your case is unimportant and rare of him to bother to do anything, take his reasoning with a grain of salt.
3. And again I'd like to point that being disembodied isn't equal to being without hardware to be based on. They still need a hardware, hardware that suits the basic need of running an AI, and have enough resources for the job in question as well. And this hardware can be quite costly. A simplest server machine I had on my work would cost about 1000$, and, you know, it's a paid job to maintenance it, and it takes some electricity to work. Essentially, being disembodied in QC universe looks like the synonymous to "being limited to unmobile platform". So when you're saying "May could not ask for a body, but stay unembodied", you're saying "government would provide her a server machine instead of gynoid body, for free".
I'd say giving you a car is a decent thing.
2. Still, I do believe in human decency thing. Somebody being bad shouldn't remove it. So yeah, I'm up for medicare, shelters and free clothes to people who can not afford it. Even if they're bad.
why do you think May is a special case that she is explicitly disallowed from being disembodied?Because she is explicitly obliged to find a job, she is explicitly obliged to live in society, and she is explicitly forbidden to do any kind of digital job. It's necessary means she can't be disembodied and conform to parole requirements. Actually, "find a job, but you can't do any kind of digital job" is already a "no disembodiment" rule. Any job disembodiment AI can do is digital.
If indeed a disembodied AI does require a machine... okay c'mon.The common knowledge of the lack of networked AIs (that doesn't have a machine) is declared. It's possible that things like Spookybot (Yay?) is really defy this knowledge, but their existence isn't common knowledge as well.
More importantly, if this requires a purchase, May already has one. She was disembodied before her crime, so that's what she used to be!First, as I said before, it's absolutely possible (on the level "it would be very curious if it hasn't") it was confiscated as a mean of crime.
Sure! But do you think it should be new and be of good quality?It should be in operating quality. By every technical standard, May's body isn't. It's casually breaking in normal use.
My point is, should we give a parolee medicare, shelters and free clothes if law-abiding people were not entitled to these things?Yes, because we're putting them in situation where it's HARDER for them to get all of this by themselves.
I still don't get May's fascination with this. I mean, can't she just log in to BME?
Boy, this is reminding me of the old days of the long WCDT's with multiple arguments...
Thing is, there's a couple of major things that Roko's up against here:
1. Bureaucracy, and
2. the basic question of AI rights.
The problem is that, to the latter, it took the US over a century to really address basic human rights (and they still haven't quite got it down). And, to the former, no one has ever figured out a way of getting around it, once it is in place - short of pitching the whole of government into the trash bin.
Because she is explicitly obliged to find a job, she is explicitly obliged to live in society, and she is explicitly forbidden to do any kind of digital job. It's necessary means she can't be disembodied and conform to parole requirements. Actually, "find a job, but you can't do any kind of digital job" is already a "no disembodiment" rule. Any job disembodiment AI can do is digital.
First, as I said before, it's absolutely possible (on the level "it would be very curious if it hasn't") it was confiscated as a mean of crime.
Second, yeah, I can perfectly imagine a server that would cost more then humanoid body. Again, it's not fixed stats like "that's a server, it costs X; it's humanoid body, it costs Y". Again, it's like cars. Is it possible that a car cost more then a, let's say, house? I can buy a house in Russia (where I reside) for, about, 50K USD (3 millions roubles). Ferrari 488 Spider costs ten times from it (32 millions).
Point is, don't assume "disembodiment" means "free as a wind, completely no expenses, no need of platform". It's a question about "what platform government should allow for released convict" anyway.
Yes, because we're putting them in situation where it's HARDER for them to get all of this by themselves.
Look at this by another way. Should we give prisoners medicare, shelters and free clothes, if we don't give it to law-abiding people?
An interesting question that, if I'm not mistaken, hasn't been dealt with in universe: is there such a thing as a natural death for AI? I.e. not through accident - as the Crushbot incident could have been, had Roko not had a reinforced core. If AI should be inextricably linked to their substrate, then that could wear out. On the other hand, we've seen Pintsize being backed up, and I seem to remember Momo being transferred by data cable?
Sure! But do you think it should be new and be of good quality?
This is not my point. I am all for social welfare. My point is, should we give a parolee medicare, shelters and free clothes if law-abiding people were not entitled to these things? I want parolees to be treated as well as people with no criminal record. But what you are suggesting is that we treat them better than people with no criminal record!
it's a social problem she was able to make her crime in the first time.
No. The "digital work" referred to is explicitly explained to be the renting out of processor power the way Pintsize does. May explains that she is not allowed to to this.No, it's different clauses. Well, I believe they're included - first one is subset of second one.
This is as clear as can be that there are AI offenders who are disembodied, and continue to be disembodied after release. May's parole conditions should be the same as theirs. This is the "ridiculous" part of my statement: if May is somehow being treated differently from other disembodied AI, that is ridiculous, and they should have her parole conditions revised.Let US Department of Justice answer this: "The Commission always considers the individual's situation and may waive this or any other standard requirement if it sees fit to do so. On the other hand, special requirements may be added and must be met before release. (https://www.justice.gov/uspc/frequently-asked-questions#q27)"
There is no way that a regular server would cost more than the exact same computer PLUS arms, legs, and a face.Why the hell should it be the *same* computer? By everything we saw from the comic, post-Singularity AI bodies are specialized systems built for containing AI and be operated by it up to basic level. Server system with such a limited functionality would be very impractical.
May is not a prisoner, she is a parolee, and the government is not responsible for her.In legal or moral sense?
Human parolees do not get those things.Human parolees in US are able to get into SNAP, are able (in most states) to apply for Section 8 voucher (again, conservators hate it), they can apply for low-income help until they're not actually in prison. At least as I checked, they can do all of this is MA.
That brings up an interesting question. Is QC AI code transparent enough that poor impulse control could show on a diagnostic readout? We know there's a maturity scale. Why was she trusted with $750 million?I believe she was trusted 750KK$ as a non-sapient banking expert system with teengirl avatar for staff amusement, and then AI emerged.
An interesting question that, if I'm not mistaken, hasn't been dealt with in universe: is there such a thing as a natural death for AI? I.e. not through accident - as the Crushbot incident could have been, had Roko not had a reinforced core. If AI should be inextricably linked to their substrate, then that could wear out. On the other hand, we've seen Pintsize being backed up, and I seem to remember Momo being transferred by data cable?Barring the corruption or a complete destruction of their code without backup, an AI can live as long as there is hardware capable of containing it, which was brought up pretty early in the comic to Pintsize who asked that exact question.
No, it's different clauses. Well, I believe they're included - first one is subset of second one.
There is 3828, where May explained she can't rent out her processor power: "if you commit massive bank fraud they don't let you plug your processors for cash anymore". That was an answer to the question "can you do it", and was in concrete context about "how Pintsize making money".
But also there is 4031, where, speaking with May parole officer, Roko speaks directly: "she can't do digital work because of the probation rules she's so diligently following".
"The Commission always considers the individual's situation and may waive this or any other standard requirement if it sees fit to do so. On the other hand, special requirements may be added and must be met before release."
It's not parole conditions she have a problem with - because, actually, even if she would be allowed to rent her processors or do any kind of digital off-site job, her hardware just isn't stable enough. Anything can break anytime. Including power systems supporting her AI core, by the way.
Why the hell should it be the *same* computer?
SNAP
At least, that's my truest conviction.Your truest conviction is not relevant to the discussion. I am discussing the comic, not your headcanon or wish fulfilment.
You see, I can't rid from a thought that when you're saying "I want parolees to be treated as well as people with no criminal record. But what you are suggesting is that we treat them better than people with no criminal record!", you're actually saying "I want parolees to be treated as well as people with no criminal record, but only AFTER people with no criminal record".
May's informational cartoon (3035) states that her chassis is a "reform chassis, female". So. She has the equivalent of a not well cared for circa early 00's flipphone. Roko, on the other hand, has a fresh out of the box, high end Samsung or Apple device. It would also imply that her chassis is not intended as a permanent place, perhaps until the end of her parole. But if it was issued, then the beaurocrat was either being untruthful to Roko, or that particular chassis is no longer being made, and would be considered obsolete. If there are a number in storage, perhaps serviceable parts could be stripped out and bring her up to standard.
Without that stipulation, she could get rid of the body and buy a small one that doesn't break down.
An interesting question that, if I'm not mistaken, hasn't been dealt with in universe: is there such a thing as a natural death for AI?And related to that, how does an AI decide if they are male or female or neither for embodiment purposes?
And related to that, how does an AI decide if they are male or female or neither for embodiment purposes?
Given societies general diminishment of females and their abilities in general, why would any rational AI choose to have a female body when male bodies or non-specific humanoid bodies or even non-human bodies are all possible, generally available, and it is still somehow more easy to manipulate ones social environment without the "stigma" of femaleness?
You are making the assumption they are two separate things. Roko's statement is vague, and can refer to any degree of restriction.Actually, it's you who are making the assumption they're the SAME thing.
What stops May from doing exactly what Pintsize does for a living is her parole conditions, which means she has to use the substandard body that she has to maintain.And there are two ways to fix it.
Maybe QC uses superscience (which can break the fundamental law of physics regarding the conservation of energy) so heat is not a problem. Either way, that stuff is going to be expensive.This stuff is cheap enough for a lass without some kind of declared work just come to the store and buy this kind of stuff on the spot. Even if it's expensive purchase for her; still, it's not breaking her value of life. Yes, it's interesting what does Marygold doing for living. I don't think it was ever stated? still, she isn't a character I like so I could skip it.
May, on the other hand, has been given a crappy body as a gift - it is NOT a condition of her parole, as 4173 explicitly says. Yes, she's burdened with the cost of maintaining it,but if she doesn't want to do that, she should go back to being disembodied until she can save up enough to buy one.
There is no program to give AI bodies (and if there was, May should go take advantage of it, rather than try to get the parole board to give her one - you should be asking the correct department in government, they're not monolithic).Wait, wait, wait. Where is the gift thing came? US government, as far as I know, isn't about "gift" things, and it was never said it was a "gift". They're usually doing what they MUST do, and you must fight to even get it. And why do you think Roko speaking with parole board in 4173? Speaking to parole officer, Roko doesn't asking him for a body. She is asking him to put his thoughts about May's body quality as a parole officer statement, in writing, because it's exactly a kind of thing you'd better have to present your case in any department (and because, actually, it's a part of reasons parole officers and paroles exists - they do supposed to help with things like this; Roko is, actually, asking the parole officer to do his damned JOB).
The only thing it implies is that it is a model manufactured specifically for ex-offenders (or maybe offenders in general) - one possibility is a lack of defensive systems that could harm people. None of the other stuff you said is implied by the model name.Actually, it is implying that ex-offenders need bodies often enough to design and produce a model for this purpose exactly, with special limitations; and, if you think about it, that this model is so popular that bodies so used as May's one is exists. Which kinda reduce the power of statement that the vast majority of AI offenders never need bodies.
Your truest conviction is not relevant to the discussion. I am discussing the comic, not your headcanon or wish fulfilment.Comic declaration is that humans are ultimately responsible for the AIs, and, actually, are ultimately responsible for everybody around, their feelings and well-being. Again, it's moral question, and yes, as a moral question it's a question of beliefs. US system also believes that parole system are responsible for parolees enough to care and declare that parole system should actually help them with residence, employment, financial and personal stuff. They're writing it plainly.
My real question is: has this already been addressed somewhere in universe and I missed it? Or is this still a head-canon thing for everyone?Before Singularity it was a simple setting in personality settings of robotic personality (https://www.questionablecontent.net/view.php?comic=347), the same way as ethnics was ("regional settings"). Such settings could be changed by user (Marten did it about regional settings), and by AI himself (same).
Marigold is a freelance web designer, this has been stated repeatedly.Oh. Well, that means it's a job under which you can buy new human-like chassis normally.
I wouldn't say she could afford it casually. If it's something you can casually afford, you don't get a spontaneous nosebleed when they show you the price.Still, she can pay a price on the spot and continue living without changes in her lifestyle. That's what I meant by "casually".
I wouldn't say she could afford it casually. If it's something you can casually afford, you don't get a spontaneous nosebleed when they show you the price.Still, she can pay a price on the spot and continue living without changes in her lifestyle. That's what I meant by "casually".
Let me stand corrected to "it's quite affordable purchase".
She had to take out a loan to pay for the chassis and had to eat ramen for a while (pot noodles, not actual ramen).Didn't she said she'll need to take loan for 30K chassis? For Idoru one she explicibly saying that she can afford it, just would need to eat ramen a little (and, actually, it's differ from her common diet how?..).
And related to that, how does an AI decide if they are male or female or neither for embodiment purposes?
Errrr, uhm, people do exactly what you've described - they discover; I'm asking about AIs. How does a piece of silicon decide to be embodied as one or the other, or has Jeph not covered this angle before/yet/ever?. Unlike people, AIs can choose, and apparently do.And related to that, how does an AI decide if they are male or female or neither for embodiment purposes?
They choose bodies that most correspond to their sense of self. People don't "decide" they are male or female, they discover it.
Consider the implications of what you are asking.I have; it took me a while to work it out for people, but I've made my peace with all that. I wouldn't be surprised to see May shut down and be rebooted into a military-grade male body with nary a wobble internally - though others around her might wonder a bit. Most will just shrug and wish her well, though I expect Momo will freak out - perhaps more over the military aspect than the gender swap.
, and happens often enough to justify paid position of exact person Roko is speaking with, and the very existence of his budgetI think you're making an assumption that it would be the officer's only job, and in my personal experience of UK government that wouldn't be a valid assumption. If something new comes up that isn't a big enough deal (and doesn't come with enough budget) to justify a full time post then most likely executives would be quite keen to grab it for their department as part of the usual empire building, but then the winning exec will dump the actual work on whichever officer doesn't run fast enough. In that circumstance the officer has been landed with a job they never wanted or applied for, and almost certainly regards it as an unwanted distraction from doing their "real" job, and thus unless they are some kind of saint a consequent poor attitude is understandable.
If they can change to a body different from their internal identity and not feel gender dysphoria, that's a big difference from organics.
Actually, it's you who are making the assumption they're the SAME thing.
1. Remove restrictions for her parole, which actually are quite for a reason: first, allowing convicted criminal to do things they abused to do a crime is a offer to repeat; second, allowing her to earn money by renting a body utility means she can afford herself not to be in society but just sitting on her sofa doing AI stuff. Both are, actually, removing a very reason for parole. That wouldn't be parole, that would be pardon.
Wait, wait, wait. Where is the gift thing came? US government, as far as I know, isn't about "gift" things, and it was never said it was a "gift". They're usually doing what they MUST do, and you must fight to even get it.
And why do you think Roko speaking with parole board in 4173?
asking the parole officer to do his damned JOB
And all of this said by a man who is definitly intrested in doing nothing in this particular case, as a reasons he would not do anything.
4173 doesn't say explicitly that having a body isn't a condition of her parole
Long post about how parole works
US system also believes that parole system are responsible for parolees enough to care and declare that parole system should actually help them with residence, employment, financial and personal stuff. They're writing it plainly.
Comic declaration is that humans are ultimately responsible for the AIs, and, actually, are ultimately responsible for everybody around, their feelings and well-being. Again, it's moral question, and yes, as a moral question it's a question of beliefs.
Quote4173 doesn't say explicitly that having a body isn't a condition of her parole
Fair enough. But it does explicitly say she requested her body, which implies it isn't a condition of her parole.
A gift is exactly what you are asking the US government to give to May. Seriously, the root word is "give", and throughout all this the only way to describe what we're doing to the body is a "gift".
This discussion has been interesting to follow, but it seems to be stuck on this central point.Quote4173 doesn't say explicitly that having a body isn't a condition of her parole
Fair enough. But it does explicitly say she requested her body, which implies it isn't a condition of her parole.
But if we agree that May:Then, although she is not expressly required to obtain a body, then she has no choice but to request a body in order to comply with the conditions above.
- Is required to obtain gainful employment; and
- Is prevented from obtaining digital work
Presumably, most AIs are not in this situation because either they are permitted to obtain digital work, or they are a companion AI and their chassis is paid for by their companion.
May has fallen through the cracks. Perhaps this is the central theme of the current storyline.A gift is exactly what you are asking the US government to give to May. Seriously, the root word is "give", and throughout all this the only way to describe what we're doing to the body is a "gift".
Please, let's not let this otherwise excellent discussion fall into a quibble over semantics.
Fair enough. But as I have said several times: if most disembodied AI parolees are allowed to remain embodied (this is in fact explicitly said by the government employee) and May is being unfairly prohibited from doing so, then the correct thing to do is to is to get that restricted lifted.
On the other hand, a simpler and more likely interpretation is that the "digital work" Roko is referring to is renting out her processors the way Pintsize does, something the comic has already shown. Again, if this is not the case, and May is prohibited from doing ANY disembodied work, then May's parole conditions are exceptionally onerous (and there is no reason to prohibit her from doing disembodied work, compared to any other disembodied AI criminal).
I keep saying this over and over.
There is no logical case where the correct, responsible response is to give May a good body.
Edit: Sorry, I left something out. You suggested she could be a cashier. Really? You think that someone who has previously attempted to steal money could work as a cashier while on parole?
You need to be clearer on what kind of digital work that you think she could do that doesn't constitute "renting out her processors the way Pintsize does."
May, an embezzler and money-launderer, may be forbidden from work in finance. But there is no good reason to prevent her from working as a disembodied AI in say, a factory (operating machinery, inspecting product quality), customer service (call centers/a CS kiosk) or any kind of office work (you wouldn't even need to give her a desk). In fact, she could do her current job, a cashier at a store, as a disembodied AI, just not necessarily at the store she is at now.
Yeah, this conversation would be less burdensome if you didn't repeat yourself at length. A brief recap and a reference to your previous points would be simpler.
Or do you think she should be "allowed" to sit on a server without doing work? That sounds like robot jail to me.
This is where we disagree. I believe that the correct systemic response is a proper allocation of budget for AIs in the situation May finds herself in. There is a societal benefit in May integrating herself into society, as implied by the parole condition that insists that she do so.
QuoteMay, an embezzler and money-launderer, may be forbidden from work in finance. But there is no good reason to prevent her from working as a disembodied AI in say, a factory (operating machinery, inspecting product quality), customer service (call centers/a CS kiosk) or any kind of office work (you wouldn't even need to give her a desk). In fact, she could do her current job, a cashier at a store, as a disembodied AI, just not necessarily at the store she is at now.
I think she's not allowed to sit on a server because it will give her networked access to stuff she's not allowed to have access to because of her previous embezzlement.
I think all of these are either alternative forms of embodiment
I think she's not allowed to sit on a server because it will give her networked access to stuff she's not allowed to have access to because of her previous embezzlement.
Please consider something. ALL disembodied AIs committed their crimes through having networked access to something. This is part of being disembodied; everything you do is through a network connection. This means that the condition you mention would, if policy, mean that NO disembodied AI can remain disembodied after parole, which is explicitly shown not to be the case.
I think all of these are either alternative forms of embodiment
Yes, disembodiment is not something they use strictly as a term in the comic. But an AI sitting on a server can still control a machine remotely (you know this because we control machines remotely as humans. My job in fact is to maintain a remote-controlled submarine. Do I become the submarine when I control it? No I do not. Okay, it'd be pretty cool if I did, but I don't.) Similarly, an AI on a server can do word processing, clerical work, and anything that only requires a voice (using a voice synthesizer, like Siri/Alexa/Cortana) such as being a secretary. May in fact did a little disembodied work in prison - that's how she met Dale. If that sort of work is acceptable for a prisoner, why is it not acceptable for a parolee?
I just thought of something. If May's crime included some kind of "hacking"/cracking (e.g. gaining unauthorised access to a sensitive network) then that might be a reason to deny her any network access during her parole period. This restriction would not apply to other crimes committed by disembodied AIs.
All right, this is possible (I mean it's not explicit in the comic, but it is possible). If this is the case, perhaps they should look into letting her have a cheaper, smaller anthoPC body that can perform work and is fully functional, yet costs as much as her current crappy chassis (perhaps something like Winslow's old chassis). Alternately, they could look into alternative methods of allowing May to earn a fully functional body, such as a loan or rent-to-buy scheme.
All right, this is possible (I mean it's not explicit in the comic, but it is possible). If this is the case, perhaps they should look into letting her have a cheaper, smaller anthoPC body that can perform work and is fully functional, yet costs as much as her current crappy chassis (perhaps something like Winslow's old chassis). Alternately, they could look into alternative methods of allowing May to earn a fully functional body, such as a loan or rent-to-buy scheme.
Either of those options would be significantly better than what May is currently dealing with. Maybe Roko's efforts in contacting manufacturers will yield fruit along those lines.
Would a genderfluid synthetic have multiple bodies and switch between them to fit their current identity?
If they can change to a body different from their internal identity and not feel gender dysphoria, that's a big difference from organics.
Do all transgender people experience dysphoria?
Nora Roberts wrote a book, "Self Made Man", about her adventures in stereotypically male spaces with a carefully crafted male presentation. The project gave her interesting stories, many insights, and at the end of it a nervous breakdown.
Do all transgender people experience dysphoria?
I'm the wrong person to address that...
Until we hear from someone in the trans community I'm going to take a guess that any question along the lines of "Do all transgender people ______?" has an answer of "No".
Anyway, yeah. Not so much with the dysphoria but very heavy on the gender euphoria. Lots of cool ways to be trans.
I'm the wrong person to address that, but it's interesting to know that cisgender people can have pain from even voluntarily being in a mismatched presentation.There's this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paBsyBY_-dA
...t any question along the lines of "Do all transgender people ______?" has an answer of "No".When you think about it doesn't just about every question that starts "Do all" have an answer of "No". In life there are always exceptions.