From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!spool.mu.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!destroyer!ncar!noao!amethyst!organpipe.uug.arizona.edu!helium!corleyj Thu Oct  8 10:11:06 EDT 1992
Article 7103 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!spool.mu.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!destroyer!ncar!noao!amethyst!organpipe.uug.arizona.edu!helium!corleyj
>From: corleyj@helium.gas.uug.arizona.edu (Jason D Corley )
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: AI rights
Summary: AI responsibility
Message-ID: <1992Oct3.004112.9660@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu>
Date: 3 Oct 92 00:41:12 GMT
References: <1992Oct1.232114.1593@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <POLLACK.92Oct2154405@dendrite.cis.ohio-state.edu>
Sender: news@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ
Lines: 28


The concept of rights, at least most of the ones mentioned
in governmental documents (i.e.the Constitution, the
Magna Charta, etc.), is based on the idea of reciprocation:
that is, beings have rights only in that they fulfill a
responsibility to their society.  For instance, the right
to free speech is given on the condition that we fulfill 
our responsibility to not use it to put others in danger
(yelling "fire", ad nauseum).

Certainly there are exceptions to this rule, (the right to
exist is usually considered a universal constant, as is the
right to free thought) but the vast majority of what we
consider rights also come with a set of responsibilities.
Until AI constructs are able to comprehend, understand
and carry out those responsibilities, they cannot be said
to have rights.
	I see that I have mentioned the right to free
thought: an interesting concept when dealing with
AI.  At what point do we, the creators, have to let
our AIs begin programming themselves, as they have achieved
that right of self-cogitation?  Difficult questions.

	I have only just started reading this newsgroup,
and I am enjoying it very much.  Thanks!

	Jason
	Ono-Sendai R&D


