News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Rogue One – An Engineering Ethics Story by toxican on Monday December 26, 2016 @09:29AM (#13258341)
Tatooine is beyond the Republic's sphere of influence. Droids only develope personalities after going a long period of time without a memory wipe (a quirk of their programming?) R2, 3PO, Chopper, and K-2 are the only canonical droids we see with personalities.
Re:Rogue One – An Engineering Ethics Story by umbrai_nation on Monday December 26, 2016 @10:08AM (#13258458)
Is a memory wipe any better than slavery? In a world with the technology to wipe human minds, you could say the same about us.
Re:Rogue One – An Engineering Ethics Story by toxican on Monday December 26, 2016 @12:25PM (#13258954)
The way the phenomenon of them developing personalities is presented, I would say yes it's better than slavery. Memory wipes are a part of routine maintenance (and security protocol in case of government or military use), and prolonged skipping of that maintenance can result in a personality beyond the one programmed into the droid. Their personalities are little more than a glitch in an old system that needs a wipe.

Now if the actual intention of the wipes is to keep your droid in check and keep it subservient, yes that's absolutely slavery. But I've never seen it presented that way.

These kinds of things are difficult to discuss because they're not explored in the way they are in harder scifi like Star Trek. With Star Wars you're expected to take everything at face value and technology is hardly ever explained in-canon.

Re:Rogue One – An Engineering Ethics Story by jdfellow on Monday December 26, 2016 @11:27AM (#13258719)
Hence the 4-year lifespan in Blade Runner.
Re:Rogue One – An Engineering Ethics Story by sqeaky on Monday December 26, 2016 @05:03PM (#13260018)
Because Killing your slaves somehow justifies slavery?
Re:Rogue One – An Engineering Ethics Story by thousandautumns on Monday December 26, 2016 @10:42PM (#13261149)
Depends on if you view killing them before they develop into what is considered a being with rights I guess. It's honestly the exact same debate as abortion. I agree with you, for what it's worth.
Re:Rogue One – An Engineering Ethics Story by naasking on Tuesday December 27, 2016 @10:10AM (#13263520)
It's not the same as abortion at all. A droid can be given or sold to someone else who wants to let it grow into a sentient being. Fetal or placenta transplants simply doesn't exist. These two scenarios are simply not the same.
Re:Rogue One – An Engineering Ethics Story by sirclueless on Monday December 26, 2016 @07:10PM (#13260467)
At the risk of introducing a contentious topic into polite discussion: there's an obvious parallel with abortion. It's seen as pragmatic, and maybe even kind, to terminate an entity's existence before it can achieve the intelligence and sentience that grant it moral rights.

If you're OK owning and operating a robotic arm, and not OK with owning and operating a sentient AI, then what to do with robotic arms that develop sentience over time?

Re:Rogue One – An Engineering Ethics Story by Asooka on Monday December 26, 2016 @01:45PM (#13259263)
HK-47 will always be canon in my heart. Even if he'd prefer us all dead.
Re:Rogue One – An Engineering Ethics Story by cthalupa on Monday December 26, 2016 @07:26PM (#13260519)
IG-88? He had enough personality to go rogue and become a bounty hunter, and is canonical.
Re:Rogue One – An Engineering Ethics Story by toxican on Tuesday December 27, 2016 @01:17PM (#13264806)
Oh true, and presumably 4-LOM as well.