AI's, holograms, and robots
- Thread starter Valenti
- Start date
A few months back there was a story about a man who wanted to marry his sex doll. So sure, marry your hologram.
When it comes to rights, what exactly is going to be in possession of these rights?
Is it the projected hologram (light and force-fields), or is it the program that rest in the mobile emitter, or the program in the ship's main frame, on Earth is it the program that is uploaded into "the cloud?"
When it comes to rights, what exactly is going to be in possession of these rights?
Is it the projected hologram (light and force-fields), or is it the program that rest in the mobile emitter, or the program in the ship's main frame, on Earth is it the program that is uploaded into "the cloud?"
Last edited:
It's not a straightforward question with a straightforward answer whether a man made machine can possess the same quality of sentience that humans can. If we're just biological machines made of a network of connected neurons that communicate through electric impulses and the release of chemicals, and our experience of sentience is manifest from those complicated mechanisms, who's to say that the same sentience can't manifest from equally complicated electronic machines?
I'm not saying it can or it can't, I'm just saying the answer is not obvious.
And it's absolutely not the same thing as marrying a doll or a car. That's a ridiculous comparison, this question isn't whether inanimate objects can have rights, it's a question about whether animate machines that really seem sentient can actually be sentient.
I'm not saying it can or it can't, I'm just saying the answer is not obvious.
And it's absolutely not the same thing as marrying a doll or a car. That's a ridiculous comparison, this question isn't whether inanimate objects can have rights, it's a question about whether animate machines that really seem sentient can actually be sentient.
I don't think sentience plays any real role there. Why should it? Marriage is either about legal rights of possession, or lust, or both. Neither technically requires sentience from both parties, and possibly none is required from either of them. Now consent might be required, but people today find ways around that easily enough, ways unrelated to sentience.
In any case, a hologram and a human would be unlikely to have the same level of sentience. Odds are, the human would be the less sentient one of the two. And the less immortal, etc. What sort of a marriage contract could be formulated to protect the poor inferior human? Not that today's marriages would protect a severely disabled person from his or her spouse much - but as long as marriage is a legal issue, with societal aims, the customs of the day are likely to reflect that to some degree, and perhaps to better take into account "disparate" spouses.
As for joining Starfleet, we know the organization doesn't sweat sentience, as Data never could produce a document establishing that he had such. (Neither, apparently, could Picard.)
Perhaps there is a don't ask, don't tell policy. Perhaps sentience is assumed implicit of anybody who expresses the wish to enlist (even if that person's sanity may remain in doubt). In any case, what goes without saying for Starfleet is far from legally binding for the anal-retentively law-abiding or law-abusing, as shown in "A Measure of Man" - and the episode also makes it clear that Starfleet isn't going to do anything about this in the near future. From the looks of it, Starfleet is as inclusive as it possibly can.
Timo Saloniemi
In any case, a hologram and a human would be unlikely to have the same level of sentience. Odds are, the human would be the less sentient one of the two. And the less immortal, etc. What sort of a marriage contract could be formulated to protect the poor inferior human? Not that today's marriages would protect a severely disabled person from his or her spouse much - but as long as marriage is a legal issue, with societal aims, the customs of the day are likely to reflect that to some degree, and perhaps to better take into account "disparate" spouses.
As for joining Starfleet, we know the organization doesn't sweat sentience, as Data never could produce a document establishing that he had such. (Neither, apparently, could Picard.)
Perhaps there is a don't ask, don't tell policy. Perhaps sentience is assumed implicit of anybody who expresses the wish to enlist (even if that person's sanity may remain in doubt). In any case, what goes without saying for Starfleet is far from legally binding for the anal-retentively law-abiding or law-abusing, as shown in "A Measure of Man" - and the episode also makes it clear that Starfleet isn't going to do anything about this in the near future. From the looks of it, Starfleet is as inclusive as it possibly can.
Timo Saloniemi
Last edited:
The holographic rights stuff from VOY was tedious.
If you want to explore this line of thought, what about the holograms used in countless adult simulations? Would they be classed as sex slaves?
If you want to explore this line of thought, what about the holograms used in countless adult simulations? Would they be classed as sex slaves?
What episode did I miss where O'Brien becomes a sex worker?!?!?!
If you marry your left does that make your right the mistress? 
Is it bigamy to marry both hands?
At the very least, marriage requires reciprocation. Both parties need to understand the contract they are entering into. It's not a question of equivalent mental capacity so much as both parties clearing a minimum bar.
There was the episode where the holodeck malfunctioned, and someone on DS9 had to play the Vulcan in the Vulcan Love Slave program, to keep the Grizzlian ambassador distracted.
Guess who the "someone" was.
Last edited:
#obrienmustsuffer
Didn't he join the Orion Syndicate one time? There may have been some momentary confusion during orientation when he misspelled the word "slaver" on his application.
What law in which nation has that written down, though?
Sentience doesn't feature in legislation much, here on Earth. Things might be different in the diverse UFP. But then again, they need not be, as "The Measure of A Man" explicitly establishes there is no working definition of sentience admissible in court. In both cases, real and fictional, it's apparently better not ask because the answer would be quite unhelpful.
(Not really asking is also quite typical in marriages, regardless of whether one asks for consent or sentience. The answer is supposed to be implicit: even in ceremonies featuring questions, either "I consent" or then "I have no alternative but to consent" is contained in the "I will" bit, and that's that.)
Timo Saloniemi
WTF are you talking about? Marriage is a contract. Legally speaking, it has nothing to do with either possession or lust. Like any contract, it absolutely requires consent from the parties involved, and that absolutely requires the capacity to consent, which requires legally recognized sapience. There is no way around that.
I am literally not clear on what you're trying to say here. "Measure of a Man" makes clear that Data is intelligent, conscious, and self-aware in the eyes of Federation law—as, presumably, is any other comparable AI. What matters is not the physical substrate (whether mechanical or biological—or holographic), but the mental capacity.
Well, sure, here on Earth there's only one species recognized as intelligent and self-aware. The last competitor for that status went extinct over 30,000 years ago. But in the Federation, you can bet your bottom dollar that they have ample precedent defining the status.
What are you talking about? The episode establishes the criteria quite clearly: intelligence, self-awareness, and consciousness. With those criteria in mind, the magistrate determines Data free to choose his own destiny — i.e., sentient. The court demurs on the metaphysical question ("Does Data have a soul? I don't know that he has. I don't know that I have."), but that's completely irrelevant, as a soul has never been a legally recognized concept (nor should it be).
Ceremonies have very little to do with formalizing marriages. They're all but optional, really. It's all about the license.
It really was. And it was lazy and stretched the credibility of the show, a lot.
Centuries of AI research, countless autonomous processes running seamlessly everywhere, but give an app a face and suddenly it has rights.
The EMH was supposed to an on and off-able emergency resource. That it remained operational when not required was a major bug for ship trying to conserve power. And the Terse, Tetchy, Sarcasm and arsehole sliders were all set too high in the personality settings. Smug mode should have been disabled too.
The whole thing could’ve been resolved with ctrl alt delete after each use.
As good as those TNG Moriarty episodes were, having the Holodeck being able to create sentience that way was a bad call. It really makes Soong to look like an idiot. Positronic brain was supposed to be a huge deal, his life's work, something no one could duplicate... except every holodeck in every star ship could basically achieve the same results, even though no one had even designed them to do that.
Nobody is talking about current existing laws, we're speculating what the laws will be if AI ever becomes sentience. Current existing laws on modern Earth, or the way it works in countries where marriage is female slavery, are immaterial to that debate.
Similar threads
