autistic robot girl enjoyer

she/her, adult, KOR/ENG

[peachfromcmbyn]

I feel like my crocodile mom can protect my wife and girlfriend and my friend and that random old woman from the other crocodile while I rescue the money.

[velnar3]

[askvectorprime]

vector prime how would you fell if someone made a morden family style sitcome of your 13 borthers and the prime wars never happend and you all living your lives like normal cybertronias

Dear Sitcom Seeker,

I did not realize that broadcasts of my TV show had made it to your realm! Yes, in fact, in one universe, the Thirteen are stars in a sitcom. The show was originally titled Covenant, and the first season had 551,349,818 episodes; ratings were low by the end due to the heat death of the universe and changes in key demographics. Network executives tried to capitalize on a "mockumentary" style with a fresh new name: 13!. Here are some of the synopses:

"Pilot": Prima works at a dead-end paper company. He flirts a lot with an executive assistant.

"I Missed My Alarm, part 1!": Starring yours truly! I talk to a camera about how I keep on missing my alarms. The Guardian of Time, missing his alarm! Reader, imagine the hilarity! I make sure to be mugging for the camera as much as possible.

"Forging the Documents": Starring Solus Prime and Megatronus Prime. Unaired, due to conflicts between the leads.

"Clip Show": Amalgamous Prime has an entire episode built out of jump-cuts and flashbacks of other shows.

"I Missed My Alarm, part 2!": I go back in time, quite literally, to the beginning of Part 1 and undo the premise, and film the time paradox for the audience.

"Beast Whisperer": Onyx Prime visits couples who have trouble with their pets, offers them solid advice, and then eats them all.

"Do Not Watch This Show. It Will Kill You": Liege Maximo stares at the camera for 22 minutes, attempting to annihilate the thoughts of any unfortunate viewers. Unaired.

Please be sure to contact your streaming entertainment provider to catch the rest of the episodes!

[abandonedniche]

oh so some people can just listen to a song and understand the lyrics

[abandonedniche]

what if you’re all lying

[abandonedniche]

not even an exaggeration

[sigmaleph]

Suppose it were verifiably possible to create sentient robots, as in robots who have preferences and personalities and can be happy or unhappy (how did anyone verify this is true? idk. somehow they did). Suppose further that we have a lot of control over what the robots' personalities are like; we could make it so they genuinely enjoy doing labour for humans, or we could make them have a human-typical preference distribution with a wide variety of possible ways they enjoy spending their time, including where some of them will enjoy being assholes to people (or robots), or any number of other things. There is no such thing as a 'baseline unaltered robot personality', only whatever we program in.

Proposal A says we should make a lot of robots who love doing the kinds of labour that is necessary for civilization to continue but most people don't much like to do. there might also be robots who like making music or writing novels or doing weird robot hobbies no human gets, but we should make enough shitty-job-loving robots that nobody needs to do a job they dislike.

Proposal B says we should slightly adjust robots to be more prosocial than humans are by default, such that e.g. no robot will like hurting people, but otherwise give them human-like personalities.

Proposal C says robot personalities should be identical to human personalities in distribution, including some robots who are e.g. violent or super racist.

Proposal D says we should not make any sentient robots at all.

These proposals are of course not the only possibilities, but imagine in this scenario they are the only ones with significant numbers of people behind

Which proposal do you think is most ethical?

A, robots who love doing jobs most humans don't

B, robots who are like humans but 'nicer'

C, robots who are like humans including some of them suck

D, no sentient robots

Voting ended onMar 25

[sigmaleph]

#im shocked at how many people have chosen A :sob:#you don't think it would be incredibly distressing#to find out that your entire personality and hobbies#have been manipulated so that you're stuck doing some menial task

the hypothetical is that the robots have been made such that they're ok with it. so they wouldn't find it distressing

[fangs-4-fags]

Well, I'm saying that the very idea that someone's messed with your head and manipulated the way you think about the world, in order for you to be ok with doing something, would be distressing for a sentient being to have to come to terms with. Which I guess is kind of paradoxical if they are forced to be okay with it. But even if every single robot would be wholly and completely okay with it I would still say it's wrong to do that to anyone.

[cartanacia]

this is an interesting question. on the scenario's own terms, i would say D, no sentient robots. but i think the scenario is also pretty flawed.

i think it would be helpful to first be clear about what words i'm using, since a lot of people use words like sentience and consciousness and others interchangeably. what i understand sentience to be is having a point of view or subjective experience of the world. so sentience would involve actually experiencing emotions like happiness and sadness and actually seeing or hearing things, while non-sentience would be like, a machine being programmed to start a sprinkler system when it detects smoke. a sprinkler system isn't getting sad about a fire and crying. people often talk about consciousness, which i understand to be made up of sentience + sapience + self-awareness.

there's no reason to create sentient robots for work. there's no increase in productivity from sentience alone. there could be an increase in productivity from sapience (the ability to know things and reason) or self-awareness (the ability for something to reflect and decide to change itself), but sentience alone just means the ability to feel happy or unhappy about work, like the scenario says. and i think sentience and the ability to feel happy necessarily brings along with it the ability to suffer, which makes creating the robots unethical. i think automation is good, but there's no reason to insist on sentient robots doing the work unless the benefit is that the robots will only ever be happy, which is impossible.

so anyway, the bigger issue i have with the scenario is that i think the idea of programming experience in this way is absurd. we barely understand the relationship between human brains and human experiences, and we really understand almost nothing about non-human experiences. happiness and suffering are inherently subjective and ineffable and can't be objectively defined or predetermined. just think about how different the perspectives that humans have on happiness and suffering can be. they're not reducible to having one neurotransmitter or not having another. creating sentient beings inherently means that each sentient being's experience of the world will slip away from any other's experience of the world. so no matter how carefully you try to exclude suffering from a sentient robot's programming, it wouldn't work. the definition of suffering is something that is constructed and reconstructed through experience.

[art-now-south-korea]

A Revival, haevan Lee

A Revival My artworks are included about the distinct characteristics of the area.

https://www.saatchiart.com/art/Painting-A-Revival/890081/3276274/view

[pink-factory]

이해반

길 위에서

캔버스에 유채, 가변크기 (9점), 각 30x30, 2019년

작가노트

Haevan Lee

On the Road

oil on canvas, variable size (9 parts), each 30x30, 2019

Artist Statement

[mayhem444]

𝑀𝑒𝒸𝒽𝒶𝓃𝒾𝒸 𝒜𝓃𝑔𝑒𝓁𝓈

[and-not-waving-but-drowning]

Jack Whitten, “9.11.01.” at New York City’s MoMA / Ahmed Gaber for The New York Times

For the next several months of 2025, the Museum of Modern Art is featuring a sweeping retrospective of Whitten’s career. The title piece is an example of radical vision; it’s a painting that’s built, not brushed.

[paintedout]

Jack Whitten, Study For Atopolis E, 2014

[not-terezi-pyrope]

I forgot that Americans spell it "mommy" and that therefore "strong as fuck ice mummy" was unabiguously about some sort of undead ice lich, and not ambiguously also about a sort of buff frosty milf archetype like I had been imagining for most of the past couple of years

[teaboot]

How does it feel to walk about the world and perceive with such profound transformative capacity

[necrowtic]

You seem like you dont know how to drive a car.

if i cant get somewhere via public transportation then its not important enough for me

[necrowtic]

my noble knights (bus drivers) bring my royal carriage (bus) to my beautiful castle (dyke bar)

[tendie-defender]

[sistersorrow]

The later this gets posted, the funnier it gets

[cadaverer]

i think in the same way you have to remove threats of suicide from your internal vocabulary for the sake of your mental wellbeing you should also remove threats of murder from your external vocabulary for the sake of your capacity to interact with other people. especially threats to entire demographics i'm sick of reading 'kill all [group]' like thats in any way a normal thing to say.

[oldwebtreasure]

The Happy99 worm, also known as Ska or i-Worm, was a worm for Windows, appearing in 1999. The worm would display a gif of exploding fireworks in a window titled “Happy New Year 1999!″. This was the first worm known to spread via e-mail and usenet. Other than attaching itself to the user’s computer, this worm did no damage.

[ymutate]

Theodor Severin Kittelsen (1857 – 1914) Norwegian

Skovtrold, 1899

[redlipstickresurrected]

Kang CheolGyu aka 강철규 aka CheolGyu Kang aka Kang Cheol Gyu aka Kang Chieol-gyu (South Korean, b. 1990, Gimcheon, South Korea) - 유령 (Ghost), 2021, Paintings: Oil on Canvas