Has to be materialist for AI rights...

[chegitz guevara]

As a hard core materialist, there's no divine spark that differentiates a man from synthetic sentient robot. Both are machines. One just happens to be made of organic materials.

The difference is between being able to interact with the world and be aware of your own existence. Copy my brain into a computer and it's meaningless, because it has no sensory input, no awareness of self.

As egalitarian, by what logic do you jump to the conclusion that robots, a tool, should have same right as a person. Would u give a dog the same right as a person?

There are some who would, but since the dog lacks self awareness, I would argue no, it shouldn't be. On the other hand, a self aware machine with the data of a human which can interact with the real world is the same as a person, and thus should be accorded rights.

 

[chegitz guevara]

There's a book, The Stone Canal, in which humans have been "uploaded" (i.e., copied and murdered) into machines, and then made to work off the effort it took to make their robot bodies and new grown human flesh.

 

[The Founder]

Perhaps we need an intermediaye step now we have species right

AI outlawed relates to undesirables
AI servitude relates to Slavery
AI Tolerated relates to residency
AI Full Rights related to full Citizenship


Leave the extremes end to Spiritualist and Materialist respectively and the middle two to everyone else, so in the OPs situation the Synths could be free, colonise but not vote or be leaders under the residence policy

A very good idea. A minor Improovement can be made:
Just keep the current system. And solve everything via Species rights for the T3 Robots. And then just let enslaved/free Robots give Spiritualist/Materialsit Atraction. Same way it works for Egalitarian/Authoritarian and Xenophile/Xenophobe.

Maybe the policy should be more about how Robots are viewed by the state:
As Tools? As any Xenos? As full equals to main species?

I think the important thing here is that ethic-based factions should not be allowed to demand rights (or denial thereof) that their ethos cannot grant. If egalitarianism or xenophilia does not imply a belief that sapient AIs are people (or mechanically allow a nation to grant rights to artificial intelligences), then the egalitarian and xenophile factions should not demand or care about the rights of robotic POPs.

My perspective as a materialist is that it does not matter whether the intelligence resides in meat or circuits and both deserve equal rights.

Okay, people keep overreading it so I have to repeat:

That Egalitarians consider Robots to be "limited in Movement" is a clear bug:
Egalitarians do NOT care if the Robots have Citizen Rights (like Voting, Leadership).
OR if they are enslaved (Servitude).

 

[arctvrvs]

A very good idea. A minor Improovement can be made:
Just keep the current system. And solve everything via Species rights for the T3 Robots. And then just let enslaved/free Robots give Spiritualist/Materialsit Atraction. Same way it works for Egalitarian/Authoritarian and Xenophile/Xenophobe.

Maybe the policy should be more about how Robots are viewed by the state:
As Tools? As any Xenos? As full equals to main species?


Okay, people keep overreading it so I have to repeat:

That Egalitarians consider Robots to be "limited in Movement" is a clear bug:
Egalitarians do NOT care if the Robots have Citizen Rights (like Voting, Leadership).
OR if they are enslaved (Servitude).

I would rather have materialist and spiritual split from the other ethics.
it's something that's already done in a way with the 3 ascension paths.
You would have the 6 ethical choices at the beginning and during the game you move your specie towards the 3 paths materialist/biologic/spiritual.

your actions (building robots, uplifting or improving a specie, building temples) would move you on the paths and unlock further options.

Each pop would have one of the 6 ethos and one of the 3 paths. Normals would only care about their need being fulfilled (not a big difference with the main path) while extremists would not tolerate the existence of the other 2.

ideally you could imagine mutant psionic cyborgs ^^

 

[The Founder]

I would rather have materialist and spiritual split from the other ethics.
it's something that's already done in a way with the 3 ascension paths.
You would have the 6 ethical choices at the beginning and during the game you move your specie towards the 3 paths materialist/biologic/spiritual.

your actions (building robots, uplifting or improving a specie, building temples) would move you on the paths and unlock further options.

Each pop would have one of the 6 ethos and one of the 3 paths. Normals would only care about their need being fulfilled (not a big difference with the main path) while extremists would not tolerate the existence of the other 2.

ideally you could imagine mutant psionic cyborgs ^^

There is a problem here: Utopia is a DLC. That path would thus be locked agaisnt anyone not having that (or any future Ascension Path focussed) DLC.
Also it would require a massive rework. And they literally just did their massive rework. They finished it last Thursday.
Factions and Ethics as we have them now are here to stay. We need to learn to live with them and think of them/with them in our sugestions.

And now that I understand both the Ethics Atraction and Factions, I think it is not a bad approach or Logic:
http://www.stellariswiki.com/Factions
http://www.stellariswiki.com/Ethics_attraction

 

[Carmilla]

I just ran into this in my United Nations of Earth playthrough where I'd gotten cybernetics for everyone and is basically as anti-slavery as its possible to be, via ethos and civics both, but nope according to this my empire is still a bunch of enslaving bigots because apparantly an interstellar nation that -loathes- the very concept of slavery would still happily enslave something that is clearly self-aware? Seriously? AI rights being locked to materialists doesn't make any sense to me what so ever no matter how I try to view it.

So does anyone know how to mod this particular bit of nonsense out? Or at least how to add egalitarian and xenophile to it?

 

[Destiny's Player]

For non-materialists, there should just be a research that does something like "Proof of Sentience", which serves as a prerequesite to full AI rights. And in lore, it's basically lots and lots of testing to determine, whether robots are sentient or just machines, plus research on what is considered sentient.

 

[arctvrvs]

I just ran into this in my United Nations of Earth playthrough where I'd gotten cybernetics for everyone and is basically as anti-slavery as its possible to be, via ethos and civics both, but nope according to this my empire is still a bunch of enslaving bigots because apparantly an interstellar nation that -loathes- the very concept of slavery would still happily enslave something that is clearly self-aware? Seriously? AI rights being locked to materialists doesn't make any sense to me what so ever no matter how I try to view it.

So does anyone know how to mod this particular bit of nonsense out? Or at least how to add egalitarian and xenophile to it?

It is frustrating right ? Especially since you can meet something like the infinity sphere that is clearly a sentient AI.

For non-materialists, there should just be a research that does something like "Proof of Sentience", which serves as a prerequesite to full AI rights. And in lore, it's basically lots and lots of testing to determine, whether robots are sentient or just machines, plus research on what is considered sentient.

Yeah, same for psionics. I got a researcher that has psionic speciality but somehow is unable to research it.


Ideally, something like the event in limbo where you put them in bodies, meeting the infinity sphere should give you proof of sentient AI.
For psionics having a researcher with psionics could be it.

 

[Destiny's Player]

Yeah, same for psionics. I got a researcher that has psionic speciality but somehow is unable to research it.


Ideally, something like the event in limbo where you put them in bodies, meeting the infinity sphere should give you proof of sentient AI.
For psionics having a researcher with psionics could be it.

My theory for psionics is that the Shroud, being sentient/controlled with sentient beings, simply doesn't let Materialists to access it because they'd be hard to manipulate like everybody else.

But yeah. The Infinity Machine would also work.

 

[Carmilla]

It is frustrating right ? Especially since you can meet something like the infinity sphere that is clearly a sentient AI.

Frustrating is mildly put given it completely wrecked my playthrough. Thankfully I managed to figure out how to fix this blatant mistake pretty fast. I'd prefer to not have to go in and mess with the code to fix something so nonsensical though.

 

[The Founder]

I just ran into this in my United Nations of Earth playthrough where I'd gotten cybernetics for everyone and is basically as anti-slavery as its possible to be, via ethos and civics both, but nope according to this my empire is still a bunch of enslaving bigots because apparantly an interstellar nation that -loathes- the very concept of slavery would still happily enslave something that is clearly self-aware? Seriously? AI rights being locked to materialists doesn't make any sense to me what so ever no matter how I try to view it.

So does anyone know how to mod this particular bit of nonsense out? Or at least how to add egalitarian and xenophile to it?

I know of no mods and unforunately the Workshop is overrun with mods for the Old Rebel Faction System.

Fixing it would be rather easy. It is literally a single line missing in either File.

It is frustrating right ? Especially since you can meet something like the infinity sphere that is clearly a sentient AI.

You only know that if you interact with it. And Spiritualists will just declare it a "Holy Object" and never even try.

 

[Carmilla]

I know of no mods and unforunately the Workshop is overrun with mods for the Old Rebel Faction System.

Fixing it would be rather easy. It is literally a single line missing in either File.

Yeah I fixed it pretty fast once I found the proper code for it.

 

[Stellar Mav]

Speaking in general, some things should be barred depending on the chosen ethos, yet most things should still be accessible to most ethos.
Here I agree completely that only spiritual governments should be opposed to - and therefore unable to - give AI certain rights. Extremists should even go so far as to being upset about AI pops being granted rights under a caste system, even synths being nothing more than "constructed slaves", mechanical servants in their eyes.
(But that only based on the ideas in the game of what the ethos represent (*), since I could imagine a spiritual people being accepting of the idea of a ghost in the machine.)

(*) I still find it quite difficult to decide, what each ethos really represents, what the devs thoughts about them are.
Xenophile-neutral/indifferent-xenophobe makes the most sense.
Opposing militaristic with pacifistic makes me think militarists for them are warrior clans/Klingons.
Authoritarian and egalitarian seems not to fit to well either, since I could imagine a kingdom (so an empire in game terms), in which all people have equal rights - well, just for the royal family being a bit more equal then ... - also, what does a government look like that is neither/neutral on this axis?
Spiritualists and materialists I guess are to represent religious fanatics and techno-phile atheists, yet as with all others, if you do not go neutral, than you already are halfway extremist on either path.

Simply doubling the values for both steps in any ethos seems a bit simple here. At least a broader differentiation of what each step allows civics-wise and what would trouble pops belonging to each ethos seems required?

 

[arctvrvs]

Speaking in general, some things should be barred depending on the chosen ethos, yet most things should still be accessible to most ethos.
Here I agree completely that only spiritual governments should be opposed to - and therefore unable to - give AI certain rights. Extremists should even go so far as to being upset about AI pops being granted rights under a caste system, even synths being nothing more than "constructed slaves", mechanical servants in their eyes.
(But that only based on the ideas in the game of what the ethos represent (*), since I could imagine a spiritual people being accepting of the idea of a ghost in the machine.)

(*) I still find it quite difficult to decide, what each ethos really represents, what the devs thoughts about them are.
Xenophile-neutral/indifferent-xenophobe makes the most sense.
Opposing militaristic with pacifistic makes me think militarists for them are warrior clans/Klingons.
Authoritarian and egalitarian seems not to fit to well either, since I could imagine a kingdom (so an empire in game terms), in which all people have equal rights - well, just for the royal family being a bit more equal then ... - also, what does a government look like that is neither/neutral on this axis?
Spiritualists and materialists I guess are to represent religious fanatics and techno-phile atheists, yet as with all others, if you do not go neutral, than you already are halfway extremist on either path.

Simply doubling the values for both steps in any ethos seems a bit simple here. At least a broader differentiation of what each step allows civics-wise and what would trouble pops belonging to each ethos seems required?

Yes, this is what I was saying too. Someone without ethics should be able to do whatever he wants. ethos are here to restrict you, and even that, with the new faction system is unnecessary. If you do things they don't like, they will be unhappy and revolt.

 

[scaper12123]

I ran into this issue and was frankly very annoyed. The worst part was the existence of enslaved synth pops was upsetting my xenophile faction. Like... they're robots! Produced by US! What do you care about their rights? You're not materialists!

 

[The Founder]

(*) I still find it quite difficult to decide, what each ethos really represents, what the devs thoughts about them are.

The Faction Issues and Ethic Atraction should make this kind of stuff a bit clearer. It is the more advaned version of the old Pop-happiness modifiers. And it can do a lot more:
http://www.stellariswiki.com/Factions
http://www.stellariswiki.com/Ethics_attraction

Authoritarians have a difficult proposition keeping their Ethic atractive. If you can force them to abandon Slavery even once, there is a decent chance the Egalitarians will either tear it appart. Or he will have to switch for that Ethic. From the Authoritarian viewpoint, Egalitarianism is a danger that must be supressed and defeated at every turn.

From the viewpoint of the Egalitarian in turn it seems as if Egalitarianism is inevitable. There are just way more sources for Egalitarianmism then Authority.

 

[BurlapNapkin]

I wonder if this current status quo makes the AI rebellion more likely to happen.

I agree that any (non spiritualist) empire should be able to grant residence to synthetic pops. Spiritualists should perhaps be allowed to purge them, but it would be cleaner if this was done as a species control rather than the policy it currently is.

Does anyone else feel like there's basically no reason to enslave machines if you aren't forced to? I often build them, but keeping them enslaved just has no upsides, especially for synths. I would love to see a more tempting option for AI enslavement, perhaps a research/mineral output boost for enslaved Synths. This could represent shackled AI crunching numbers for you using all the cycles they have?

As a delicious terrible idea, this one never looks appealing, but it *should*. Maybe droids should have a little bit of this flavor as well, to bring non materialist empires in on the conundrum.

 

[NoTarget]

Freedom is the right of all sentient beings.

 

[redharo]

The difference is between being able to interact with the world and be aware of your own existence. Copy my brain into a computer and it's meaningless, because it has no sensory input, no awareness of self.



There are some who would, but since the dog lacks self awareness, I would argue no, it shouldn't be. On the other hand, a self aware machine with the data of a human which can interact with the real world is the same as a person, and thus should be accorded rights.

This is moot point, there is no test you can create to prove self awareness.

For all I know, I am the only one with self awareness and everyone else is a machine programmed to respond in a way that seems like they have self awareness.

Case and point, people have created tests like the "self awareness test" but when someone programmed a robot to pass that test, people didn't believe that Robot is actually self aware

 

[The Founder]

Does anyone else feel like there's basically no reason to enslave machines if you aren't forced to? I often build them, but keeping them enslaved just has no upsides, especially for synths. I would love to see a more tempting option for AI enslavement, perhaps a research/mineral output boost for enslaved Synths. This could represent shackled AI crunching numbers for you using all the cycles they have?

Enslaving a Synth has the usual advantages - slavery bonus on tile yields.
Wich is already quite a lot, especially if you consider that you will most likely drop the original robots on mining fields.