Re: Why is Star Trek so robophobic?

"Victor Velazquez" <k-canute@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:AImdnT3avM_QaQHanZ2dnUVZ_rmjnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> "Sean O'Hara" <seanohara@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
> news:6048utF1oh1elU1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> In the Year of the Golden Pig, the Great and Powerful Victor Velazquez 
>> declared:
>>>
>>> What incentive could intelligent robots possibly have to wipe out 
>>> organic sentients?  I could see it as an anomalous event, sure, but 
>>> every culture that produces them?  Get out!
>>
>> Resource competition? A technological civilization requires a lot of 
>> farmland, and maybe the robots have better ways of using it. Or maybe 
>> they want all the steel and titanium on the planet for their own 
>> reproduction? Or maybe they just produce a lot of toxic waste and the 
>> cost of cleaning it up isn't worth the benefits of preserving the
organic 
>> ecology.
>
> I can see where an AI might find it advantageous to make copies of
itself 
> in a limited fa****on, or maybe sub-routines per Neal Asher's Polity 
> novels, but isn't a reproductive drive pretty much an artifact of 
> mortality + biology? IOW, how many AIs would an AI need to do whatever
it 
> is an AI could possibly want to do?
>

Every time it does a dangerous act.

It's like playing a video game where you constantly save your game.

-- Ken from Chicago