Literally just mainlining marketing material straight into whatever’s left of their rotting brains.

    • oktherebuddy@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      wow we can’t speculate about things that could exist, only things that do exist. this was written on a communist website btw

    • Saeculum [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      By that way of reasoning, the replicates aren’t people because they are characters written by the author same as any other.

      They are as much fiction as sentient machines are science fiction.

      • usernamesaredifficul [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        ok sure my point was the authors aren’t making a point about the nature of machines informed by the limits of machines and aren’t qualified to do so

        saying AI is people because of Data from star trek is like saying there are aliens because you saw a Vulcan on tv in terms of relevance

        • Saeculum [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s fair, though taking the idea that AI is people because of Data from Star Trek isn’t inherently absurd. If a machine existed that demonstrated all the capabilities and external phenomena as Data in real life, I would want it treated as a person.

          The authors might be delusional about the capabilities of their machine in particular, but in different physical circumstances to what’s most likely happening here, they wouldn’t be wrong.