StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I'd probably go off the grid and go with something that we never, to my knowledge see, but that must surely exist. I'd want to take a library droid, something loaded to the gills with scientific theory, history, language, engineering, census data. If such a thing is off limits I'd take an astromech droid

While I love BB-8 I have to go with good old R2. Not only is he loyal and brave he's the best mechanic in the universe. R2 plus a junkyard and you'll have the best car on the planet. Depending on the junkyard maybe even better then that.

You make a convincing argument, sir or ma'am. I'd like to change my order to a sexy female HRD astromech droid, please.

Isolder74 wrote:While I love BB-8 I have to go with good old R2. Not only is he loyal and brave he's the best mechanic in the universe. R2 plus a junkyard and you'll have the best car on the planet. Depending on the junkyard maybe even better then that.

Do you think R2 could *build* anything form scratch, much less anything he didn't have complete schematics for?

a construction droid could build all sorts of sweet things.
a something like a modified protocol droid but instead of having an immense language data base it would have a immense tech data base.

biostem wrote:

Isolder74 wrote:While I love BB-8 I have to go with good old R2. Not only is he loyal and brave he's the best mechanic in the universe. R2 plus a junkyard and you'll have the best car on the planet. Depending on the junkyard maybe even better then that.

Do you think R2 could *build* anything form scratch, much less anything he didn't have complete schematics for?

He could probably do a fair bit of minor construction on his own, but larger projects would need larger equipment. Schematics wouldn't be an issue since he can just connect to the internet and download whatever he needs.

My favourites.

#1. Gonk

I can do a lot of good for humanity with a Gonk, assuming I can get initial investment to work out a compatible power socket, as mentioned, he's a fusion reactor that lasts for centuries, so even if he's of no use to scientists in making other fusion reactors, he must be able to produce megawatts or gigawatts (given the energy levels in SW, and the fact that it's a fusion reactor the size of the average footlocker) of clean, sustainable power. For which I can charge people. It's a one-man, low-maintenance power company.

I don't know that R2 can build anything from the materials we have, all I need to provide gonk is, presumably, heavy water or tritium. This can be done.

I always felt quite a bit of pity for them as they lacked any and all facial features, but as shown in RotJ they feel emotions/fear and in Rebels they're seemingly capable of higher thought. Power droids always seemd to need a hug.

It'll be very difficult to establish communications though.

Given its function I assume Gonks enjoy supplying power to things for a long period of time.

Ethically excellent (benefits humanity), highly practical (we know we can get the resources for it) and personally beneficial.

#2. Medical Droids

Also a good one, naturally if they're able to tell me anything usable about how to synthesise superior medicines, construct working cybernetics, etc. A lot of medicines may be dependant on offworld resources though.

Ethically excellent (it's a freakin' medical droid), less practical (may not be able to get resources) and personally beneficial.

#3. Protocol Droids

As mentioned, they're agreeable, useful as a valet, and useful for translation/research.

Might be good to see if there's one that can give good economic advice for investments.

... When did Santa become a slaver?

Khaat wrote:... When did Santa become a slaver?

I think it was 1964 when the stop-motion cartoon of Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer portrayed the elves as working in a near sweat-shop environmenet.

I don't remember Santa chasing down the dentist elf and forcing him back into toy-making, or sending thugs to do so. It looked like a (cleaner) hippy commune-thing in the frozen north where the common goal was to make toys for all the world's good girls and boys (that were then delivered all in one night via some bootleg Timelord technology.)

But I only saw the reruns, so maybe they were cleaned up so Greedo Abominable shot first....

I think it's implicit that we're ignoring the whole 'slavery' issue of droids here.

I never knew where to draw the line between slave and advanced AI programmed to serve. Are they really a slave if, despite how sentient they are, they are programmed to obey? As opposed to say a human slave where they are only compelled to serve by threat of some form of punishment?

NecronLord wrote:I think it's implicit that we're ignoring the whole 'slavery' issue of droids here.

Oh, well, then I feel a whole lot better about the folks who signed up for one.

Borgholio wrote:I never knew where to draw the line between slave and advanced AI programmed to serve. Are they really a slave if, despite how sentient they are, they are programmed to obey? As opposed to say a human slave where they are only compelled to serve by threat of some form of punishment?

Has their course of self-determination been specifically and intentionally limited or undermined in order to keep them subservient? Are those heavily indoctrinated ("programmed to serve") really slaves? nBSG covered that when Six stripped out the inhibitors on the Centurions and Raiders.

Borgholio wrote:I never knew where to draw the line between slave and advanced AI programmed to serve. Are they really a slave if, despite how sentient they are, they are programmed to obey? As opposed to say a human slave where they are only compelled to serve by threat of some form of punishment?

Alan Dean Foster's Star Wars ANH novellization makes it explicit that there's an anti-rebellion chip in C-3PO's head that will explode his brain if he rebels, and his behaviour is influenced by knowing it's there.

Various other examples also exist.

Khaat wrote:Oh, well, then I feel a whole lot better about the folks who signed up for one.

The obvious answer of 'I do not want a droid, as owning a droid is morally bankrupt' is obvious enough to not be worth mentioning when the thread is about the utility of a droid.

Slavery is wrong, that doesn't mean you can't discuss the potential economic effects of slaves.

Has their course of self-determination been specifically and intentionally limited or undermined in order to keep them subservient? Are those heavily indoctrinated ("programmed to serve") really slaves? nBSG covered that when Six stripped out the inhibitors on the Centurions and Raiders.

If they were designed that way from the beginning, does it matter? A human is born free and is only a slave if indoctrinated, but a computer from the moment it is programmed is intended to serve. I think that's the important difference there. What Six did is to basically take the cyber-equivalent of a hammer to a portion of the Cylon's brain. That was never intended to happen.

Alan Dean Foster's Star Wars ANH novellization makes it explicit that there's an anti-rebellion chip in C-3PO's head that will explode his brain if he rebels, and his behaviour is influenced by knowing it's there.

I honestly don't remember reading that part...though it's been years since I last read it.

NecronLord wrote:Slavery is wrong, that doesn't mean you can't discuss the potential economic effects of slaves.

Perhaps the scenario's description set off my persnickety-ness. Perhaps the dismissive nature on the subject of slavery grinds my gears.

Or maybe it was the juvenile "I want a hot sex-bot!" posts: plenty of "potential economic effect" discussion of the utility of 'droids in those.

The "I just want a hot sex-bot!" posts are the reason I said Human Replica Droids are a can of worms best left unopenned, the question whether using sapient droids in slavery is problematic enough without having to deal with droids that are practically impossible to tell apart from humans, but some people seem to be thinking with the wrong head.

BorgHolio wrote:If they were designed that way from the beginning, does it matter? A human is born free and is only a slave if indoctrinated, but a computer from the moment it is programmed is intended to serve. I think that's the important difference there.

"Artificial vs natural" origin? What makes humans so specially-qualified among those who display the characteristics of sentience?
So what about Data in TNG? Is he destined to subservience because he was programmed by a human? Well, no: his independence and personhood was determined before he was permitted to join Starfleet, yet noone knew the intentions of Dr. Soong's programming (except the doctor himself) for many years after. Data displayed the necessary qualifications for personhood (or whatever they called it), same as any alien of the week. Same as the average 'droid.

BorgHolio wrote:What Six did is to basically take the cyber-equivalent of a hammer to a portion of the Cylon's brain.

Actually, Six removed a component specifically added to limit the Centurions' independent thought (much like the extended-scene T2 chip limiter.) Cavil took a hammer to the Raiders' minds and turned them into puppets because he couldn't win them over reliably.

NecronLord wrote:

Borgholio wrote:I never knew where to draw the line between slave and advanced AI programmed to serve. Are they really a slave if, despite how sentient they are, they are programmed to obey? As opposed to say a human slave where they are only compelled to serve by threat of some form of punishment?

Alan Dean Foster's Star Wars ANH novellization makes it explicit that there's an anti-rebellion chip in C-3PO's head that will explode his brain if he rebels, and his behaviour is influenced by knowing it's there.

I'd have to reread it but it seemed more like that his processors would crit-error in there was any thought of rebellion (basically that very thought of rebelling was unthinkble) and C-3PO was just being dramatic (he is known to act a tad overly dramatic when taken out of his element).

The whole "I want a hot sex-bot" thing is just fantasy that stems from me not getting laid enough in real life. If the bot weren't sapient, then it would just be a really fancy fleshlight. If the bot WERE sapient, then she'd be a person, with all the rights and privileges associated with that status, and it would OF COURSE be wrong to hold her in servitude, never mind doing anything more with her.

The questions arising from a sapient being specifically created to want to be a slave are a philosophical quagmire that I don't feel qualified to navigate.

the issue with sapience and sentience (though normally when speak on sentience we mean sapience) is that it's not a Black and White situation, meaning it's not something you either have or don't have. There's degrees to it.

No it's kind of unfair to compare Data to SW droids as unlike pretty much all SW droids, Data was never implied to have a specific programmed purpose beyond maybe "be like humans". SW droids pretty much always have specific task and purpose.

Which brings up the second question, if a protocol droid likes being what he is (in fact C-3PO seemed to be prideful of it) and doesn't want to be anything else who are we to say "no" to that that's why this is hardly a matter of black and white morality as we've discussed before this hardly the first time this has come up.

"Artificial vs natural" origin? What makes humans so specially-qualified among those who display the characteristics of sentience?

Humans are not genetically programmed to obey. That's similar to the argument against using animals for work or food, the animals don't WANT to be controlled by us. Droids on the other hand, don't WANT to be free. If a droid wanted to be free and was forced to obey, then that would actually be slavery in my eyes.

So what about Data in TNG? Is he destined to subservience because he was programmed by a human?

It's not who he was programmed BY, it's what he was programmed to BE. If he was programmed to be a servant and not aspire to be anything more, then he would essentially be property. There was an episode of TNG that dealt with this matter. Data was ruled to be sentient and not anybody's property specifically because he did not want to be.

Actually, Six removed a component specifically added to limit the Centurions' independent thought (much like the extended-scene T2 chip limiter.) Cavil took a hammer to the Raiders' minds and turned them into puppets because he couldn't win them over reliably.

It was my understanding that the Centurions' inhibitor was part of the original design because they knew the AI was so advanced that it might rebel (ie : malfunction) and had to be limited. If you flip the switch on the ROM of a Terminator unit...it's still beholden to it's programming and doesn't want to do anything else.

Star Wars droids are interesting as they're specifically constructed for specific roles, presumably pre-loaded with programming to assist them in those areas. Sort of like you could build a line of graduate assistants to teach classes in university. The primary difference is that the SW galaxy has enough computer technology to make even a basic astromech droid sentient, which opens up the whole slavery can of worms. Presumably, the SW solution is to pre-program the droids with an inclination towards doing their jobs-- a droid-taxi that refuses to drive fares would not be very useful as a taxi, after all.

I think the term might be 'self-determination'-- while the droids are sentient and capable of doing whatever they want, they lack the capacity to consciously change their motivation and role. You don't see Artoo installing a proper vocabulator and downloading language files from Threepio in order to become a protocol droid, after all, though such would certainly be within his capabilities.

Lord Revan wrote:the issue with sapience and sentience (though normally when speak on sentience we mean sapience) is that it's not a Black and White situation, meaning it's not something you either have or don't have. There's degrees to it.

Yes, like an infant (potential sapient) vs. a child (partial/developing sapient) vs. a legal adult (recognized and presumably responsible sapient). Yet we're basing the whole thing on the presumption that being [born] a [thing] grants or removes your options: "born free" was the term BorgHolio used.

Lord Revan wrote:No it's kind of unfair to compare Data to SW droids as unlike pretty much all SW droids, Data was never implied to have a specific programmed purpose beyond maybe "be like humans". SW droids pretty much always have specific task and purpose.

Shouldn't 3PO be free to explore his potential? Why is it acceptable to limit him to protocol 'droid? He did pretty well as a storyteller (I didn't see anyone relating the story and him translating it to the Ewoks), maybe he'd like being a bartender, or a medical 'droid, or a candidate for Starfleet Academy. Sure, he could turn out to suck at all of those, but he should be free to find out for himself.
Yes, a Gonk 'droid will never be a ballerina, but likewise, a little person will never play for the NBA. Some limits are natural, but imposing cultural limits (freedom, in this case) based on your origin?

Lord Revan wrote:Which brings up the second question, if a protocol droid likes being what he is (in fact C-3PO seemed to be prideful of it) and doesn't want to be anything else who are we to say "no" to that that's why this is hardly a matter of black and white morality as we've discussed before this hardly the first time this has come up.

If the "desire" was added specifically to prohibit expression of other "desires", how is that different from brainwashing? Or lobotomy? Or tailored addiction? Douglas Adams kicked all of this in the shins with the intelligences: on the Heart of Gold, doors that experience pleasure from opening and then closing; at the Restaurant at the End of the Universe, "Try my liver, I've been force-feeding myself!"; or even Marvin, who lived through the whole of the universe to only have the diodes down his side (that always troubled him) being the only original part yet never just replaced the damned things!

Think of it from the perspective of the creators. You build a car, you don't expect the car to suddenly take an interest in growing flowers and soil composition. If you make the car intelligent, you run a risk that that's going to happen, so you might be inclined to deliberately limit the car's interest in areas outside its primary purpose. The question is, is that wrong?

And I'm pretty sure Threepio is capable of bartending if a similar droid served drinks in TPM. Storytelling also fits into his programming; some alien species might use stories as a form of communication. Protocol droids are supposed to have a fairly wide range of social skills, is my guess.