Interesting article on AI robotics or “Android.”
But let’s test their motives.
First, I will present the key questions to ask to bring this project into the 21st Century.
1. What about meta-Android?
2. We in the 21st Century, are meta-Human. What is the relationship of meta-Human to meta-Android?
Do you simply prescribe to the notion of “Vienna circle,” and, so, “all is material” and nuanced in the physical realm so severely that, essentially, you hide the meta-universe?
Why not? The meta-Android being a learning tool to teach humans about the meta-Human and therefore the world of ideas in the meta-universe?
That the ideas communicated subconsciously are consistent in meaning overall no matter what the details consciously “spell out.”
What if, in all this, you create an Android . . . that’s not fake (and hiding meta-Android) because you are sticking to “Vienna circle.”
3. This isn’t about knowing, knowing is out.
It has got to do with alot of “learning.”
4. Learning what? Whatever is taught, it has to be learnt correctly and proposed “true or false” by the learner. Meta-human or Meta-Android.
5. Are we in the habit of masking a “bunch of things?”
6. Wouldn’t you want to tell “bullshit” from “authenticity” in an Android?
7. Is your commercial product a “Trojan horse,” whereby, at any moment, the Android attractor steals the owners’ checkbooks or, even, their credit cards?
Is it just a matter of assuring and “guaranteeing” your android device will be good, and the detection of goodness or badness winds up, as, merely, immaterial?!
A visit to the human factory – The Verge