No. I'm very certain that my Roomba is not conscious. But If we can't tell whether or not these people are conscious or not, then I don't think it's right to have this power over them. A better parallel than a Roomba would be an animal.
pileghoff
joined 2 years ago
I think most applications store it in plain text, but makes sure the file is only readable by the current user. This way, we rely on the protection of the OS, instead of doing it ourselves. (I'm not a desktop app developer, so I might be completely wrong, but I think this is what e.g. Firefox does).
How do you test that? How do you know that people around you actually have conscious and not just seem to have? If you can't experience anything, how do you fake conscious? And is this fake conscious really any less real than ours? I think anything that resembles conscious well enough to fool people could be argued to be real, even if it's different to ours.
Can you easily communicate in your country (business/private life) without being involuntarily forced to use whatsapp?
Can you easily communicate in your country (business/private life) without being involuntarily forced to use whatsapp?
One of C's main painpoints is that development is slow. I work in embedded and there people usually use python or another scripting language along c, to handle tasks where performance and memory footprint os not an issue and you just want to build something, and then save c for when you really need it.
How would they add runtime checking without breaking all existing code?
But I think warning people is a good start, because those checks can be added to your CI pipeline and reject any incoming code that contains warnings. That way you can enforce type checking for a subset of modules and keep backwards compatibility.
I'm saying that appears conscious and is conscious could very well be the same thing, we don't know, so in this imaginary world, I would not trust anyone who told me "don't worry, you can torture them, they are not actually conscious".