on artificial pets, etc.

Trippy discussions of moral issues, conspiracy theories, the paranormal and other otherworldly phenomenon.

Moderator: Dracofrost

on artificial pets, etc.

Postby TerraFrost » Sun Mar 09, 2003 7:29 am

so... my dad was telling me about something he thought was really neat... i've actually heard about it on scientific american fronteries (the tv show)...

anyways, it's a robot with a mouth, eyes, ears, and other basic facial features. it's purpose is to mimic humans, and interact with humans directly to get more accurate data...

well... that's the hope, atleast.

i however, think it is failed for doom. for one, people, imho, aren't gonna react to robots like they would with people. atleast not until robots start looking like humans. right now, they'll either see them with wonder, which will scew their responses, or they'll see them with contempt, which will also scew their responses.

my dad responded to this by saying that he thought people had really strong bonds to electronic pets, and i replied by saying that, so long as you can buy another electronic pet that will serve as an *identical* replacement, people will never react to electronic pets as they do to real ones. i mean, a real pet is *much* more precious. you lose a real pet, and it's gone for good. you lose an electronic one, and you just go to the store, and buy a new one...

so anyways, what are your thoughts? :)
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Postby Evlfrost » Sun Mar 09, 2003 6:44 pm

I belive that robots would be treated more like toys than pets. I also agree with Terra about real pets being more presious than fake ones. I am agianst building robots that look like humans for the same reason that a lot of people are agianst shoot-em-up games. I belive that we will get them mixed up and will bring back slavery.
Evljsh: You're young and thus illegal!
xXOkashiiSuruXx: -falls over-

Image
User avatar
Evlfrost
Frost Druid
Frost Druid
 
Posts: 6692
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 2:41 pm
Location: Suburbia

Postby TerraFrost » Mon Mar 10, 2003 1:54 am

i just came up with another reason why real pets are gonna get a different reaction than fake ones :)

fake pets are gonna have a predisposition to like you. heck - they'll be friendly to someone regardless of whether they're being abused, or not, whatever. i mean, you have to *earn* a real pets love - a fake pet will love you by default, and even then, it won't be love... it'll be some sort of petty simulation of it.
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Postby Rao » Wed Mar 12, 2003 10:27 pm

I believe here that scientists are pushing to much for people these days. These "Technological" geniuses are no doubt there to improve technology, but what it seems they are trying to do here is simply profit, not for helping human beings. As for wheather the pets will be treated the same as real pets well, no one can say because no one has had the luxury of meeting every person on this planet.
Tell the Spartans, Stranger passing by,
That here, Obedient to their laws, We lie,
User avatar
Rao
Elite Guard
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:26 pm
Location: The Boondocks

Postby TerraFrost » Wed Mar 12, 2003 11:00 pm

As for wheather the pets will be treated the same as real pets well, no one can say because no one has had the luxury of meeting every person on this planet.


have you ever seen anything to counter the reasons i put forth to suggest that fake pets won't be treated the same as real ones? if not, then holding out on an opinion because you haven't yet met someone who contradicts it is, imho, rather... i dunno... absurd? i mean, if science "thought" like that, then we'd still be in the stone age... you can't know if gravity holds true everywhere, but if you don't assume that it does, then you can't take advantage of it existing. you can't know that the basic principles of aerodynamics hold true for every single position in air, but if you assume that they do, you can then make things to take advantage of that, and discover new things as a result... you can build an airplane to take advantage of aerodynamics, or space shuttles, or whatever, and then study the things... up there. without generalizations, life is kinda... pointless...

also, i kinda meant to address this last time, heh, but oh well :):

I am agianst building robots that look like humans for the same reason that a lot of people are agianst shoot-em-up games. I belive that we will get them mixed up and will bring back slavery.


i don't think people will be confussed for robots any time soon... even in the worst case - if you were to have them have human flesh, then i don't think it would be so bad... i mean, they'd still probably weigh more, they're "blood" would either be non-existant, or consist of different compounds than our own, and... yeah...

of course, that said, we could also have slavery of robots... i mean, an automated arm used in car manufacture, or something could eventually one day have an AI program that merits it having "freedom", or whatever... robots don't need to be in human form to be "conscious".
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Postby Rao » Thu Mar 13, 2003 2:17 am

Terra, if i came off rude i am sorry. My main point is that you cannot compare gravity to a person. Gravity has one thing in existence, that holds people down. Air comes from plants, this is expected, as carbon dioxide is taken in. Again, expected. But how can you expect that everyone human being will commit to these false pets, not saying some people wont like and not saying the people will. But if this was the case, why are their laws? Why are there police to protect us citizens who obey the laws of this country and the natural laws of being kind to our fellow man. It is ironic you said that, today, i saw a kid who never said a word in school around me before, and today, he was expelled for bringing a knife to school and threatening a teacher. Again, not expected from a straight A student. But i agreed with you up to the point of comparing humans to things that have been found and proven over and over again. You cant prove a human, if you could, then we ourselves would be robots.
Tell the Spartans, Stranger passing by,
That here, Obedient to their laws, We lie,
User avatar
Rao
Elite Guard
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:26 pm
Location: The Boondocks

Postby TerraFrost » Thu Mar 13, 2003 2:52 am

i actually wasn't trying to come off as rude, either, although i can understand how my post could be interpreted as such - sorry :)

and you're right... not everyone is gonna think the same way... but that's not really what i was hinting at...

the very existence of the field of psychology, and to some extenct, microeconomics, are testiment to the fact that there are some fundamental characteristics of humans - qualities that hold true for everyone.
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Postby Rao » Thu Mar 13, 2003 2:58 am

OO no not at all did i think you were rude. You know Terra this was coming...:) Tell which can always be expected? What can I always rely on a human being, from rich, middle , and low class.
Tell the Spartans, Stranger passing by,
That here, Obedient to their laws, We lie,
User avatar
Rao
Elite Guard
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:26 pm
Location: The Boondocks

Postby TerraFrost » Thu Mar 13, 2003 3:45 am

psychology only tells you what you can expect in very *very* specific situations :lila:
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Postby Rao » Thu Mar 13, 2003 4:09 am

Well give me some examples, so tell me what would happen in a situation where a beautiful women fell into a women fell, now there were two men standing there, Which one would jump in, the brave man who is foolish, or the brave man who has wit?
Tell the Spartans, Stranger passing by,
That here, Obedient to their laws, We lie,
User avatar
Rao
Elite Guard
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:26 pm
Location: The Boondocks

Postby TerraFrost » Thu Mar 13, 2003 4:49 am

well.. i think i misspoke... psychology and microeconomics only tell you what you can expect in very specific, and very basic situations. in this way, they are like the more established sciences, like physics, chemistry, or whatever...

for an example of such a... generalization, i'll rely on a microeconomics example, first.

the more you consume any given product, the less that product will satisfy you. this is the law of dimenishing marginal utility.

now, it's hard to apply that law to real life. for example, if you watch a football game once, you may enjoy it less the first time, but that may be because you had distractions, or whatever. there are lots of things in real life that can confound the results.

as far as psychology goes... well... the only class i took on the subject just gave the names of the varrious "ideas" involved - it didn't really elaborate on them that much... for example, there's pavlovian conditioning, and john white (iirc) came up with many a theory as to how one could apply inputs in an almost formulaic way to get any given type of kid... i'm just not sure what those theories he came up with were, heh.

well... thinking about it, i guess i can give you a sorta example... if you give kids to much stimulus in the begining of their life, they may sorta burn them out of learning, but if you give them too less, they won't really know how to learn... or something like that, heh. so there's some level of stimulation which you need to give kids to make them respond in a certain way...

but anyways, these situations (atleast the microeconomic ones - i would assume the same would by true for the psychology ones) are only really applicable in very simple and very specific situations. that doesn't mean that they're irrelevant - rather, that you just need to do a lot of accounting for to come up with a realistic model of the world. for example... i'm taking physics right now...

here's a sample physics question: without taking into effect gravity, when will a disc, thrown up at a degree of 15 degrees, from the horozontal, and at a speed of 15mph, land? how many seconds after it is thrown?

in real life, however, you do have to take into account gravity. you have to take into account wind direction, the aerodynamics of the disc, the density of the disc, the temperature of the outside, which may have an effect on the disc, etc....
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Postby Rao » Thu Mar 13, 2003 10:45 pm

good! You have taken me to my next point. Why study psychology? I mean, i suppose from one simple book you can learn the reactions of humans under certain stress? Under certain conditions, right? But take into account those unafraid of consequence, unafraid of death, unafraid of anything that you and I as people that are friendly would think. I am not afraid of death, but i am afraid how I die. Or where my soul soul goes after I die. I am not sure for you, But say a normal person, who goes through life, just kind of being there. Afraid of things, not afraid of things. What if he was to have a gun to his head? He would beg and plead for his life, right? But for someone who knows sooner or later he is dead, he would laugh.

I agree, psychology is good to learn how to help others, if that is whta you want to do. But, i help my friends everyday with problems. For example, i had a friend who was crushed by his grandma dying, he was a loose cannon, he hated everything and was thinking of suicide,(they were really close) I told him, think of it this way,Matt, If she could have it anyother way she would have still kept it the same. You say her take her last breathe in life, and one day will meet her again. When it is your turn. For some reason, this cheered him up.

Now tell me Terra, why should someone go through schools, spend money, and do all this work just for a few kind words that make sense. Anyone could have told him that, and he would have acted the same way. Please tell me if i am wrong for i dont understand Psychology.
Tell the Spartans, Stranger passing by,
That here, Obedient to their laws, We lie,
User avatar
Rao
Elite Guard
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:26 pm
Location: The Boondocks

Postby TerraFrost » Thu Mar 13, 2003 11:19 pm

well, like i said... the only class i took over psychology only gave, pretty much, a history of it - it didn't delve into the actual theories...

that said.. i think you could use your argument for pretty much any science. for example... physics... if you drop a ball, it'll fall. that's all you really need to know. you know this because every other time you have dropped something it fell. what you don't know is how fast it'll fall, etc.

you know your friend, so by the above analogy, you can make some predictions, but that doesn't mean you could take any random person off the street, figure out why they wanted to kill themselves (if they did), and make them not want to kill themselves. i would imagine (although, like i said - i haven't taken any formal psychology class) that psychologists, on the other hand, would be much better at it than you. that, and...

the points you use to shoot down psychology could also be used to shoot down, say... meterology... i mean, meterology isn't an exact science. you're guess may very well be, and often can be better than there's. why do you think that the field of meterology exists?

also... what most people think of when they hear the word psychology is freudian psychology... this form of psychology, although probably the most well known, isn't what modern psychology is, today, i don't think... iirc, modern psychology is now attempting to study the correlations of stuff in the brain to emmotion, personality, or whatever...

so it is my understanding that while freudian psychology may have dealt with someone's desire to committ suicide by talking to them about it, modern psychology would just look for neuro chemical imbalances in the brain, and try to give drugs to counter that, heh. or something like that, hehe :)

so anyways, back to the point that started all this... whether or not you can make generalizations for everyone... while it seems reasonable that the very existence of psychology would be testament to this, i can't give specific examples... if you want specific examples, or whatever, we should talk about microeconomic generalizations of people :)
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Postby Rao » Fri Mar 14, 2003 12:25 am

I hope that they are better than my opinions, i have no interest in that field. But I never put down psychology, i merely said that from my views and from what i have seen, it seems that it is only a few kind words. Or they say things anyone of us could have come up with had we tried to ask why am I going to kill myself, Why should/shouldn't I do this? Those are the questions.

As for metorology, i can not give you an answer, only to say that what I may say is an exact science, and what is an exact science are two far off opinions. A science to me would be, the socratic method, which you can study your whole lifetime and never master. Another one, Chemistry, you will only find more elements, so therefor it goes on forever, as does the socratic method. My science, is something that cannot be solved. I consider Astronomy, a science. A rather meaningless one, but a science, no doubt. The study of people is a science that will always go on, because not one person is the same. Butm it seems rather meaningless.
Tell the Spartans, Stranger passing by,
That here, Obedient to their laws, We lie,
User avatar
Rao
Elite Guard
 
Posts: 1532
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 10:26 pm
Location: The Boondocks

Postby TerraFrost » Fri Mar 14, 2003 12:47 am

so you're saying that all sciences are endless? well... i guess i can concede that. but you seem to be saying that they are infinite for different reasons - chemistry is infinite because there can be an infinite number of relations, and while all the ones we may have may be valid, we will always have more to discover... that seems to be what you're saying for chemistry... so i can agree with that...

so if you used that same reasoning for psychology, i'd agree, but as it is, you don't seem to be using the same reasoning... rather, you're saying that no person is the same...

anyways... to put a spin on this... if no person is the same, then... let me ask you... what exactly makes someone a person? why isn't a computer, for example, considered a person? the fact is, we are already identical in some basic ways, already. why is it so far a leap to assume that we'd be identical in other ways, as well?
TerraFrost
Legendary Guard
 
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 6:37 am

Next

Return to Twilight Zone

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

cron