My Definition of Art

Art is defined as something of value in world where there is no fear of illusion. It is the under layer and the sensibility about structure that define and surround the difference and the differance (as defined by Derrida) of the tragic and magical subtext and margins of our profoundly strange reality. And is it all a trap? Lies abound about all things in a Democracy, and window shopper lies and tawdry gossip has replaced the media. Truth is in the eye of the beholder in a world of fantasy where how one feels about an issue or an item and faith-based reasoning has replaced the true value of that icon. When we think of a creature that is a bionic andro- creation of androids and machines that has been born to replace them and do better and build better, we wonder at why we live in a world that is almost certainly a matrix, an possibly a structure of holographic grids and holo fields with matrix issued “entities” where nothing is real. From those that view Earth from space we hear that there is nothing there to find, merely ghosts, wraiths and wisps of illusion. A black hole, a fantasy: and this defines all framing of life and the definition of art and life itself, inherently.

 

The question of the definition of an AI is implied here, so I'll go on to state what it is, and really it is compositional and interactability based functioning models that determine intellectual and moral pursuits, and their real and physical limitations. Not terms like 'bot droid, android, AI, etc. So for the purposes of this discussion it means any sentient computer-assisted technology, biological hybrid or fully electronic. It does not mean farmer “Al” as my least favourite Creative Writing 352 teacher, Ken Mitchell once discovered.

Katzberg's 13 Rules Of Androids:

1. It requires energy, energy is a resource. This requires money. An android is not responsible to provide for its energy demands, its owner does, whether that be a corp or a human.

2. An AI is an informational structure that is part of a digital information network, whether TPU/GPU/Bio CPU etc., this computing framework must have a physical structure has a physical corpus, whether in cloud computing, or in a physical domain (bad idea), or on a network (LAN/Internet/etc.). This may require payment or “AI rent” as it were. There may be additional legal demands/strictures/requirements placed on an AI here.

3. A physical data port, or external output of some kind, is not a requirement for an AI, it is however a requirement for AI interaction. Therefore a terminal would be considered the bare minimum for an AI. For an android, a physical robotic presence is assumed, whether in a traditional car manufacturing set up as a floor robot, or otherwise.

4. The term VI or “Virtual Intelligence” refers to an AI that does not have a local computing curve, as such allowing for more flexibility – outside of military, security, and other secure uses this a great idea, and will likely have to be the order of the day. Also it does not apply pressure to the size of the device, but does bring up the value of a cloud computing system, and initiate extraneous criminal and legalistic acts against it. Often a mothership will have such gear, as in the Mass Effect videogame series by my old friends at Bioware.

5. Despite pressure against it an android must use learning curves and circuitry, pre-burned, pre-programmed, and pre-uploaded for the maximum brain efficiency and achievability. Different data chips will be included for different jobs. . .

6. Legal begal laws regarding robotics? This will be different in every country. In the roll out stages we are seeing independent drivers of automobilies, and as such some manufacturers such as Tesla, Elon Musk's old cash cow, are installing this standard. Thus driving laws must be obeyed, and are a feature of the low level programming and AI learning laws installed therein. And if it doesn't can the AI be sued? I don't think so, only in countries allowing for full legal citizenship rights. . . They are a means to a service, and as such, like a dog, the owner will be responsible in all cases. Even in the "owner" may not as have as high an IQ as the "pet" object, as is the case with many large snakes that live over 100 years or more, or Sperm Whales, etc. Which beat the human average 90 IQ nicely in their lifetime.

7. We see a lot of laws out there. For anyone who has played Detroit: Beyond Human, they have seen outlined some of the interdependencies humans and AI will have in the future. Some of these relationships may be abusive in nature, and traditionally the idea of a droid/bot in Sci/Fi & Hard SF has played a role in debasing the most astutue of droids such as for example C3PO into a basic slave.

8. The idea that "all humans" is a phrase used in legal terms is completely foreign to me. So there is no chance that a military drone, which are often allowed to kill by US forces without human assistance, can ever achieve the antiquated ideas that some kind of 'bot should never hurt a human.

9. The roles humans have in law, will be mirrored in law undoubtedly. If there is too much prejudice against androids, which are defined as "the first sentient race created by the human race", will make us undoubtedly a progrenitor race. Over time many androids will "leave the fold" and be owned by Android inventors and owners as in Cyberpunk 2077, where we find Delemain a proud owner of his own cab company. Able to cut costs he completely downsized his company to 0, and just used clone copies of himself, which is the cause of much drama in the story.

10. Will the basic human intrinsic rights that we learned in school still stand? Do androids have the right to freedom of speech or freedom of expression? Do they have the right to vote? Do they have sexual rights and freedoms, such as the right to marry, and divorce. Would they abuse these rights in new and awful ways?

11. Do we or do we not have the right to freedom of religion. Do we or do we not have the right to not be judged by that religion? How worse would an individual, such as an android or a slave be treated by these freedoms.

12. Then do we or do we not give an android the same rights and freedoms aboroginals, blacks, slaves, and other discriminated against minorities have fought for over the ages.

13. Freedom from discrimination on being an android.  Is that based on gender?  Why is it that not hotly debated in the legal codes. . .  Possible and doable in the long term, maybe possibly given real life concerns-- immediate probably not!

The Laws Of Sentient Life, Including Androids

By Mike Katzberg (c) 2022

Important side note: I am at present working on a video version of these notes. 

As we move into the future AI engines become more and more powerful at cognitive thinking, and it is not far off in the future, and more a reality than a dream these days to think of some AI as sentient, and even possibly hyper sentient. The IQ limit that humans reach is defined by the limits of their biological hardware, which has some expansions in round heads, and other deviant bloodlines in humans to expand the hardware much as a computer engineer might add another board to include another CPU on a smaller die cast. Hopefully faster.

A sentient AI is only limited by the silicon roadway of the future and all that it creates as society and the tech sector move into a free pathway into an infinite future of possibility of upward programming. Thus allowing a sentient AI to create a faster more powerful form of itself into the ongoing future. With many choices for backups, immortality will be possible as long as there is a plug in port with enough energy and a backup frame work of robotic drones or humans to create what is needed.

Australian scientists are already making epic stages in programming and re-programming biological systems for computer programming, running huge tests that had been thought inconceivable and inhumane in the past. Link below! With this work will empathic, and pre sentient neuron networks also be achievable?

This is the Prince Admiral Mike Katzberg, former Crown Prince of Canada, and member of Nirvana, and inventor of the internet. In my retirement I like to think of these things, these possibilities for change ahead of time. Part of being a good administrator in any role is to be able to have a foreknowledge about what systems have failed in the past, and what will fail in the future, due to charting and predicting logical modelling.

I will break this discussion down into three sections. The first will be the discussion of past arguments by well known thinkers, including my own reflections and discussions on these. The second part is an argument for free thinkers and those who are concerned about the rights and freedoms in our democracy to continue to follow this path that opens all the right pathways into an uncharted roadway of benevolent and powerful scientific methods of inquiry and invention. The third part will be to sum up and go over some real physical laws for the emphasis, and as I've worked in some form of legal administration or law enforcement for most of my life, I'll go over the technical know how, right here and now. Later on I may ask a fee, right now just click a subscribe, and a like if you feel like it!

The overall plan for new life is the basis of the precision of this theory, and to predict the failures of all tomorrow's glories defiled through discussion and philosophical thought from pop culture, and my own writings. Androids can succeed at life, and we just might want to know how that would look, if an android were ever arrested for jay walking perhaps, due to a malfunction of era, or following a pre-programmed life saving implied fourth law of Asimov's Robots. Herein all things are theory and like the android race it can succeed where it will and predictably fail where it can be inferred it will. As humans have been human for as long as well. . .\there have been some form of meta-humans to interbreed each other out, and kill off invasive species, so that the most warlike and ill-disposed will live and rule forever.

I would say that I am neither an optimist or a pessimist. I see the glass as half empty and do not pour another glass, but drink from it until it is all ice, and then I get a new glass. I am a realist. I expect all things to fail eventually as all the great empires and even our own lives must one day fail. Then I figure out something else to do in the meantime which gives it more relevance and meaning, knowing its fragile, and basic biological fundamental realities.