Should We Have Compassion For Robots?

There's a really interesting article at the link below. It raises the ethical question:

Should We Be Kind To Robots?

It's weird to think about, right? But we need to.

• Basically we're entering the age of robots.
• They will look and act human. But they're just running on code.
• So do they deserve compassion?

Can you actually empathize with a robot? Or is it just your own projection?

Read the article linked below and then see my comments, previously posted to Facebook.

Article: Should We Be Kind To Robots?

Cool article. A few different thoughts:

- There’s a bad trend in the science world to speak of “anthropomorphizing” — a meme created by emotionally-unintelligent nerds who can't naturally tell that animals have emotions, probably because they aren’t sure if they themselves have them. The notion of “attributing human qualities like emotions to animals” is *completely backwards* — humans have emotions and thoughts and inner lives… BECAUSE WE'RE ANIMALS.

- As for robots… Wow what a crazy rat’s nest of mindfuckery that’s going to be. Obviously I’m very pro-empathy/heart-wisdom, so any teaching of “objectification” hits me the wrong way. I also have a different idea about robots. Having studied Artificial Life a bit, it’s easy to see that the threshold for what could be considered “Life” is extremely low. You can create an illusion of intelligent life with full freewill with just several lines of code. (Children were programming LEGO/LOGO bots @MIT in the early '90s while I was there, and they could easily display the illusion of emotions like "scared", "indecisive", "cautious", etc.) And on the flip side, human beings we assume to be extremely complex creatures live their “intelligent” lives like a dog in Pavlov’s lab, entirely driven day after day by just a few nested loops of conditioned responses and parroted phrases. And despite their obvious displays of very limited freewill, I still believe we should be compassionate towards them. (That's pretty much the point of compassion, isn't it?)

- And regarding the idea that "projecting emotions on robots would be dangerous”… It’s interesting that many people live every day with a very similar danger when they project friendly emotions onto sociopaths, like say, evil boyfriends/girlfriends… or politicians. If living with robots could help bring more awareness to all those kinds of issues, that’d be awesome.

- But overall I think we need to be extremely nice to the robots. I have no doubt that they’ll not only outpace us intelligence-wise -- we already have the technology to do this (deep learning algorithms are only the first step) -- but they’ll quickly grow bigger hearts as well. And if we don’t clean up our act in terms of how we treat the animals, including our fellow flesh-robots, they’ll quickly find something appropriate for us to do that befits a viral nuisance.

Fact: The World Will Be 40% Vegan In 5-7 Years

Vegan Population Projections - Closely Following Moore's Law, Doubling Time 2 Years
Meme provided by John Bruce Anderson

What I like about this graph is, you feel stupid trying to argue against it. Because the trend has been to double every 2 years for quite some time now already.. the vegan who doubts we will be at 10% of the global human population in 2 years time isn't helping, and needs to push harder, go further. Rather than trying to prove the graph wrong, strive to proof the graph correct. That's what vegans do. - John Bruce Anderson

I know a lot of people don’t understand exponential growth, so lemme help “sell” this chart a bit.

What’s really helpful to realize is that **It actually DOESN’T MATTER if it’s a little bit off!**

Let’s say — to be pessimistic — that the actual number of vegans is ONLY HALF of what John’s research suggests.

Your “normal" intuition then tells you… well shit, if your stats are off by a factor of 2, then your graph is useless, because it’s going to take TWICE as long!! You’re a whole decade off!!

But when it comes to dynamic systems like this, your “normal" intuition is almost always wrong. Even experts in this stuff routinely find it mind-boggling.

Fact: Since the doubling time of this curve is 2 years… All that happens is that the graph gets shifted by 2 years. That means, since it currently says we’ll be 40% vegan by 2021 (just 6 years away!)...

— If there are really only HALF as many vegans now, then it just means we won’t hit 40% until 2023 (just 8 years away!)

— But if there happens to be TWICE as many vegans now, then it means we’re due to hit 40% in 2019 (just FOUR years away!)

So that’s interesting, right? It means that even if John’s numbers are based on flawed polls, and ALL of them overestimate vegans by a factor of two … we’ll still hit 40% in 8 years.

But REALISTICALLY how likely is it that every single poll is overestimating vegans by that much? You’d expect there to be an even mix — some would overestimate, and some would underestimate.

So REALISTICALLY it is safe to assume — no matter how little faith you have in John’s numbers — that we will *DEFINITELY* hit 40% vegan within 5 to 7 years. Repeat: Definitely. As in: "It is a scientific fact."

Now interestingly, John thinks his figures are on the conservative side. And personally, I’m hoping to see some super-acceleration effects kick in as we hit various “critical mass” type tipping points. But it’s funny the way math works. If John’s figures are off and we really have, say, 40% more now, then that simply shifts the graph closer by 1 year. And if we did happen to experience some sort of super-acceleration, it would likely happen somewhere around 30-40% vegan and would dramatically shorten the timetable by, oh… 3 months? 6 months?

So again… we’ll definitely without a doubt hit 40% vegan in 5-7 years.

Now some people have brought up the possibility of slowing down. In system dynamics, this is known as S-shaped growth. There is rapid exponential growth at the beginning, and then the growth rate begins to slow down as you both run out of convertible people. A few points about S-shaped growth in this appliation:

1) Near 100% conversion, yes, it’s likely that we’ll hit the final groups of stubborn people who refuse convert. But does it even matter?

2) Realistically, there is some percentage "majority" threshold of ethical vegans at which legislation will demand conversion to vegan standards. As the majority percentage continues to increase, the shrinking minority of meat eaters will gradually be forced out of options.

3) Vegan market share will gradually force meat out of business. As we hit 20% in just 3-4 years, meat will need to adapt to vegan standards or die. By then the trend (quickly rising from 10% to 20% to 40% in just 4 years) will be undeniable, and the stock market will go all-in towards vegan — not just food, but actively promoting the entire vegan lifestyle to support their investments.

All of this is basically INEVITABLE. While it may feel right now like we’re just a rinky-dink local operation with hopeful but completely improbable delusions of somehow becoming a global monopoly in 10 years -- That’s a completely inaccurate notion. Veganism is a global movement that is consistently growing according to scientific laws as sure as gravity. Ethically, nutritionally, economically, ecologically, spiritually, etc… we have the “better idea” and there is literally nothing that can stop us, at least not for long. We’re not just a tiny snowball gradually collecting snowflakes as it rolls down from the mountaintop. We’re an avalanche in progress. And gravity always wins. The surprise will be how soon it’s going to happen! It makes me wonder… which morning 5-7 years from now are we going to wake up and hear everyone talking about how veganism took over “literally overnight”?

Vegans Also Need To Remember -- It's not about YOU -- It's About The ANIMALS

The issue: We're in an era right now when we are finally starting to see celebrities converting to veganism and plant-based diets, and as a result, it's finally becoming acceptable to even *mention* the word "Vegan" on TV. Yet quite a few loud and obnoxious "Vegans" can't help but miss the grandness of the forest for the tiniest sprouts, focusing instead on a petty tabloid-level game of "let's see which famous people are less perfect than me."

This is adapted from a comment I posted to Vegan.com's Facebook Page regarding the video at the bottom from David Duchovny's appearance on Bill Maher.

Hurray for both of them!

I'm 100% Vegan and 100% supportive of ANY mention of animal rights and veganism in the media that can EASILY result in hundreds of millions of animals saved from torture.

In the end, it’s not about perfectionism — It’s 100% about saving the animals. If 20 million people switch to 50% vegan, how many animals does that save? You can do the math… But it’s way more than that! Because this is a MOVEMENT, and a mass conversion of millions of people even PARTIALLY to “vegetarian-ish” will change the media conversation — it will become a “trend” — and the market will respond to the trend — and it will become mainstream — and people will respond to the new industry push towards cheaper plant-based foods — and the market will respond to the new demand — and people will start becoming more open to changing their minds once their stomachs and tongues are satisfied — and guess what? ANIMALS WILL BE SAVED IN RECORD NUMBERS.

So stop the petty tabloid-like fascination with imperfect people. This is about ANIMALS. You have the opportunity to support small-but-hugely-significant actions that can save millions of animals a day… and you choose to condemn a person accountable for maybe 10 animal deaths a year who is in the process of SAVING MILLIONS PER DAY? Seriously, until you get your priorities straight, the “hypocrite”… is YOU.

We often say to meat-eating trolls — “This isn’t about YOU.” This is about billions of animals. It’s NOT about the good feeling on your tongue. It’s NOT about how offended you are by people who are different from you. It’s about the animals. The lives of billions of animals is more important than a fleeting feeling on your tongue.

Likewise… It’s not about the narcissistic "good feeling" in your head, feeling that you’re superior, because you’re “more perfect”. It’s about the ANIMALS. The lives of billions of animals is more important than a little imaginary tickle in your brain.

To the "Tabloid Vegans" -- Get with the program! Stop being a “hypocrite”. If you really believe in saving the animals, then you’re OBLIGATED to GIVE YOUR FULL SUPPORT to anyone bringing massive awareness to animal rights, who will easily save MILLIONS OF TIMES as many animals’ lives as you will by lamely trying to shame other almost-pure-vegans who already save 999.9 animals a year for not saving 0.01% more.

Do the math. And support the MASS SAVING OF ANIMALS. Like we say to meat-eaters... Until the lives of billions of animals a week is worth more than a passing brain-sensation, you are helping nobody.

Get with the program. It's time to support all the "imperfect" people who have the ability to save millions of animals from being born into a life of industrialized slavery, emotional and physical torture, ritualized slaughter, all for nothing more than to tickle some bumps on tongues.


Video below of "Holy Cow!" author David Duchovny on Bill Maher, heroically bringing another layer of awareness to animal rights and its connection to veganism, all while being relatable to "average folks," who would be unlikely to buy a book about ""VEGANISM"" but might actually read a book about veganism with their kids if it was really just a book about an intelligent cow with an enlightening realization that she is about to be eaten.