Heroes of Might and Magic Community
visiting hero! Register | Today's Posts | Games | Search! | FAQ/Rules | AvatarList | MemberList | Profile


Age of Heroes Headlines:  
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
6 Aug 2016: Troubled Heroes VII Expansion Release - read more
26 Apr 2016: Heroes VII XPack - Trial by Fire - Coming out in June! - read more
17 Apr 2016: Global Alternative Creatures MOD for H7 after 1.8 Patch! - read more
7 Mar 2016: Romero launches a Piano Sonata Album Kickstarter! - read more
19 Feb 2016: Heroes 5.5 RC6, Heroes VII patch 1.7 are out! - read more
13 Jan 2016: Horn of the Abyss 1.4 Available for Download! - read more
17 Dec 2015: Heroes 5.5 update, 1.6 out for H7 - read more
23 Nov 2015: H7 1.4 & 1.5 patches Released - read more
31 Oct 2015: First H7 patches are out, End of DoC development - read more
5 Oct 2016: Heroes VII development comes to an end.. - read more
[X] Remove Ads
LOGIN:     Username:     Password:         [ Register ]
HOMM1: info forum | HOMM2: info forum | HOMM3: info mods forum | HOMM4: info CTG forum | HOMM5: info mods forum | MMH6: wiki forum | MMH7: wiki forum
Heroes Community > Other Side of the Monitor > Thread: GREED - Machines versus Human-Beings
Thread: GREED - Machines versus Human-Beings This thread is 6 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 · «PREV / NEXT»
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted May 27, 2016 09:44 AM

People are supposed to own these robots, or more likely own a share in them and get part of the proceeds of their "labor". It's also possible that the government will tax robot owners and redistribute some of the wealth to the poor.

As for what people would do, they'd have the opportunity to enjoy lives of greater leisure. Some would take up hobbies, while others would engage in less productive but still enjoyable activities (like watching TV).
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Zenofex
Zenofex


Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
posted May 27, 2016 10:41 AM
Edited by Zenofex at 10:45, 27 May 2016.

Evolution of technologies and implementation of technologies are two fairly different things. Just because something exists doesn't mean that it will be adopted en masse in the next few decades. There are many "this will change the world overnight" inventions that come up often enough to generate a sense of Judgement Day coming for people who don't really follow the actual development of the industries but guess what - they don't. At least not as quickly as initially advertised. Big companies - that is companies with enough money to afford breakthrough technologies - are no less bureaucratic and cumbersome than state administrations, sometimes even more so. You won't believe how many corporations which looks shiny on the outside work with equipment considered obsolete for years, sometimes decades. The procedures for modernization can be a real pain in the ass and even if started can drag on for months, years just because some high manager doesn't want to lose 5 minutes of production. Then there the local laws which can make disposing of workforce quite challenging (from what I know Sweden is fairly tight in that regard too). Then there is human resistance to rapid changes, no matter what they are about - you don't just throw something new on people's heads like a brick, they'll just fight you back even if they can't reasonably explain why. And finally there's the mistrust of technology which is still pretty high no matter the advancements. All this combined makes this "robot revolution" far less dramatic than it first appears and as mentioned, nothing is never as flawless and peachy as advertised.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted May 27, 2016 11:32 AM

Salamandre said:
In general some say is a good thing. But when you face it individually, it sucks.

Try to call in a hurry any bureaucratic organism, be it your phone company, or internet one, or the health care, or taxes, or anything of that sort, you will lose hours, days, weeks talking to robots which can only deal "push this or other key". 10 years ago you could fix anything by only talking to the right person, now there are 10 idiotic machines between you and him.

Then the most funny comes when you receive your phone bill and see how much costed you those calls.

One of my worst nightmares also. When I call my bank, its a labyrinth of press this/press that before you can reach a human operator, and when you finally do, it goes something like this:
- How may I help you sir?
- Good afternoon, first of all, whatever you do, do not direct me to a machine again no matter what, I've been pressing buttons for 20 minutes, I want to talk to a person. My problem is X.
- For this, we'll have to connect you to the X department, sir. Please hold on the line. (Directs me to the labyrinth again.)

Zenofex said:
kiryu133 said:
good video on this subject
Pretty poor video on the subject:

1. There are vast areas containing no less than 2/3 of the world's population where the level of economic and social development is too low to afford automation on a large scale in the near future. The gap between these countries and the "first world" is getting bigger rather than smaller and this has been a steady trend for quite some time. As usual, people from developed countries can't get out of their small thinking boxes;

2. Automation in IT is fairly crude and expensive at the moment. An uneducated end user might think that everything works flawlessly and super-smart programs drive the Internetz but in fact there is a huge effort in the background to fix, mitigate and reduce the damage of the large amount of errors those wonder programmers who write wonder programs do all the time. Things are improving here but get worse there all the while there is a huge marketing fuzz in the front how better and smarter everything gets which isn't always the whole truth or even part of it. This particular area is likely to need a large amount of human supervision for a long time and the job demands will probably increase rather than decrease (as will the required qualification though);

3. People relying exclusively on low-end labour are always threatened by the prospect of remaining unemployed or intermittently employed, machines have little to do with this. Raw muscle strength is being replaced by work animals and machineries since the ancient times, nothing has changed all that much lately. It's a problem of the educational system to ensure that there is a relatively small amount of people in the economy who can't do anything but work as mules.


I don't think that's fair criticism.

The video never mentions, you can even say it's too careful not to mention a specific time frame. It only says robots will replace many humans as employees soon. In historical terms, soon can be 150 years. And although it's rather focused on the first world countries, once the change starts to occur, keep in mind that the poor countries will not need to be as rich as the Western ones for these to be implemented. From a capitalist point of view, for the rich elite who owns the factories and other means of production (who are not always local nationals in these times anyway), the machines don't need to be perfect, they just need to be a little better, cheaper and more efficient than the workers.

Also, it does not only focus on low-end labor. It mentions many white collar people are just as replaceable, in a way, more easily. I also think that AI's replacing artists is something stretched too far. A computer can make easy-listening melodies, even sophisticated ones but since at its core, "consuming" art is not just about enjoying a structure but relating to an emotional experience, it can never come close to something like Billie Holiday singing about heartbreak. Simulation has its limits.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Blizzardboy
Blizzardboy


Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
posted May 27, 2016 03:16 PM

Corribus said:
mvassilev said:
Robots replacing humans is obviously bad for the people whose jobs are getting replaced, but it's great for everybody else, who get the benefit of (presumably) more efficient production.

Besides - Technology has been replacing jobs for eons. Using the spurious logic of the opening post, we should go back to pre-industrial days. After all, the cotton gin, steam engine, plow, printing press, and on and on doomed generations of people to wander about with no jobs. Right? Please. Technology replaces jobs that are obsolete. Nobody now would seriously suggest we should start copying books by hand, just so there are more book-copying jobs. Likewise, there's no reason to eschew technology just because it keeps jobs around.

There will always be plenty of ways for people to earn a livelihood, no matter the technological environment.



I agree with everything you said except the last sentence isnt necessarily true.  It's an assumption because it hasn't happened yet,  but human history so far is very,  very brief.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted May 27, 2016 03:36 PM

Yep, I'm on the same page with BBoy on this one. I'm certainly not a Luddite and opposing new technology is inevitably a lost cause even if it was ethically correct anyway. But there is absolutely no reason to assume things wont get complicated like they never did before. What is even more brief than modern human history is populations at this scale.

When the same technology that enables us to reproduce more, consume more, live longer starts to replace us as employees, many crisis will emerge. The world is getting crowded like never before, since in this century, even poorer countries now have things like basic health care, vaccines etc. Yet in many places, people still have children with feudal cultural habits: As many as they can.

I think at some point things will get very rough on a global scale and it will force us into a cultural revolution about our procreating and consuming patterns. Wealth of all nations will be much more dependent on each other's policies about such subjects, so internal politics will merge with international politics like never before and nationalism as we now it will have to end.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Kayna
Kayna


Supreme Hero
posted May 27, 2016 05:08 PM

Machines are great. They allow us to put our efforts elsewhere. No machines would be like living in Poland or something.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Ebonheart
Ebonheart


Famous Hero
Rush the rush
posted May 27, 2016 05:12 PM

artu said:
I think at some point things will get very rough on a global scale and it will force us into a cultural revolution about our procreating and consuming patterns. Wealth of all nations will be much more dependent on each other's policies about such subjects, so internal politics will merge with international politics like never before and nationalism as we now it will have to end.

I agree. I am not opposed to new technology but it changes a lot of things and if done too quickly, the results can be troublesome. However, when it comes to nationalism ending, I do not agree. I think the opposite will occur.
However as much as I am worried about the robots in the future, the present economy troubles me more and so I rather shift my attention to the coming economic crisis.
Time will tell how this robot enigma evolves for my part.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
markkur
markkur


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
posted May 27, 2016 05:16 PM

Minion said:
Bureaucracy has nothing to do with technological advancements. You are messing things up here. As usual.


The problem is not on this end it is that you think you know more than you do. You honestly believe that Governments are unaware of what is going on when they are in the pockets of Multi-National entities?

The German Army had a remote-controlled tank destroyer in WWII dude. Ever since then, every Government has been after THE ULITIMATE TECHS

Atomic-Weapons - Radar - Guided Missiles -Now Drones dealing death from a PC console. Wake-up man.

Hundreds of trillions spent on mastering destruction and death and you trust things have suddenly changed?

-----------------------------

Back on topic

Grunt jobs (actual work) have always been a part of humanity...period, and they will always be needed in droves if you want people to contribute to society. There is a simple explanation that all the programming in the world will not explain and that is people are people and many like to do things with their...hands.

Folks the human being is a pain in the butt to the Greedy-Boys because they get tired, sick, retire etc. That's why only CEOs and head-hunting bigwigs make the bucks. The number one way of getting those big bucks is consolidation, dismissal of half of the workforce and then eventual replacement by Machines. It's already happened in Telecommunications!

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
markkur
markkur


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
posted May 27, 2016 05:25 PM

mvassilev said:
People are supposed to own these robots, or more likely own a share in them and get part of the proceeds of their "labor". It's also possible that the government will tax robot owners and redistribute some of the wealth to the poor.


Well that's a very nice dream but let me tell you after "giving lots of money to the government for a program called Social Security for 35 years" that I do benefit from now - the U.S. Government robbed that system  and today it is in bad shape. Now they want to END it and they treat people in the system "they created" like leeches. How the hell can things EVER go where you wish?

mvassilev said:
As for what people would do, they'd have the opportunity to enjoy lives of greater leisure. Some would take up hobbies, while others would engage in less productive but still enjoyable activities (like watching TV).


I appreciate the sentiment but it is Utopian nonsense. You actually believe you are going to be given a free-ride?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
markkur
markkur


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
posted May 27, 2016 05:28 PM

Corribus said:
There will always be plenty of ways for people to earn a livelihood, no matter the technological environment.



Missed this: What ways?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Ebonheart
Ebonheart


Famous Hero
Rush the rush
posted May 27, 2016 05:36 PM

markkur said:
Folks the human being is a pain in the butt to the Greedy-Boys because they get tired, sick, retire etc. That's why only CEOs and head-hunting bigwigs make the bucks. The number one way of getting those big bucks is consolidation, dismissal of half of the workforce and then eventual replacement by Machines. It's already happened in Telecommunications!

But you seem to forget the fact here that unlike the workers, they PROVIDE WORK. It is easy to lash out on CEOs and entrepreneurs but at the end of the day, THEY create work.

While greed is a problem, the opposite problem is that it is very difficult to actually be in charge of people. It's not just sitting behind a desk, drinking coffee and looking at the paycheck. A lot of responsibility is handed to a boss when it comes to human employers. Because unlike machines they need a secured salary, they ask for vacation, they can have good and bad days and while I hate to contribute to the rotten fact mill, the governments in certain countries make life for employers a living hell.

Robots, solves all these problems and also takes the responsibility away from the employers and lets them give the middle finger to all rules and demands from labour unions, governments etc.
If a country would ban robots or implement heavy taxes for them, companies are likely to move to another country just like they do today and the very same country would have a hard time to compete with other countries.


 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted May 27, 2016 07:45 PM

markkur said:
Well that's a very nice dream but let me tell you after "giving lots of money to the government for a program called Social Security for 35 years" that I do benefit from now - the U.S. Government robbed that system and today it is in bad shape
That's a good point, but many countries manage to fund their redistribution policies without this kind of massive problem. One way to avoid this problem is to distribute the money immediately rather than putting it in a trust fund, which is the problem with Social Security.
markkur said:
I appreciate the sentiment but it is Utopian nonsense. You actually believe you are going to be given a free-ride?
Given people's strong desire for a free ride, I don't think it's out of the question, especially if we manage to convince them not to forgo technological improvements. If we can channel the energy that's currently going into Luddism towards basic income, it would be a definite possibility - there'd be less reason to oppose it since it'd be more win-win compared to Luddism.
But to consider the simpler scenario in which we own shares in the machines - if the machines are productive enough to give their owners a free ride, who's going to stop us from enjoying it?
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
markkur
markkur


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
posted May 27, 2016 09:49 PM

mvassilev said:
there'd be less reason to oppose it since it'd be more win-win compared to Luddism.


Well no one has spoke to me in disagreement about my valid comments and very serious concerns till you...just now.

I am not for heading back to the stone age what I believe is necessary is management of TECH because of it's undeniable and unknown effects on human society. In truth the massive change that have happened have not even been an experiment (c'mon you men of science)that would require a "control" but as that is not possible nor usually even thought of...EVERYTHING dreamed-up is introduced.

I'll give one small example; Does anyone here think Nuclear Warheads are a good thing?

Because man (without God) is God and sets no limits to what he will achieve the entire world lived in great fear since 1945, spend untold billions during the cold war and still worries about this TECH falling into the wrong hands. I think this is the great fear that causes so many actions from the West that are often at odds with most rational people around the world. Just soak all of that up and let it be for a bit.

mvassilev said:
But to consider the simpler scenario in which we own shares in the machines - if the machines are productive enough to give their owners a free ride, who's going to stop us from enjoying it?


Damn man another "nice" thought but you cannot be standing with both feet on the ground. I just told you that they (those very nasty they) are wanting to close down a system that is designed for the people, the masses and not the Elite. Do you really think you are going to be given a robot that will grant you your Utopian wish? Hell, man the internet is not free because everything you do on-line is tracked recorded and sold. If you cannot actually read a book for free, unless at a real existing on the earth public library, you will be given state of the art technology?...to make your life better?? Wish I had your trust but I've none of it.

---------------------------------------------------------

I am writing something that will require a bit of my time but I want to explain (much better than I have) were I am coming from; I did not arrive here by chance or waking up one morning and finding a fly in my cereal. I've lived a hard life of work and had/have a great many friends that crossed many industries. I do not have answers but I want to better tell my story because I believe many here, one day, may need to defend/speak for/represent...the People. GREED is one very strong enemy in many ways today. No one here should not know that already and least should be hearing it from me for the first time.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
markkur
markkur


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
posted May 27, 2016 10:00 PM

Ebonheart said:
But you seem to forget the fact here that unlike the workers, they PROVIDE WORK. It is easy to lash out on CEOs and entrepreneurs but at the end of the day, THEY create work.


Ebonheart you are wide-awake and thinking...good for you. We are more on the same page than not.

As far as CEOs. <imvho> you really need to look into this topic. AND I was talking about CEOs...not people who are actually creating work. I'll give you a hot-lead; go back to the story of the break-up of AT&T and follow all the trails. And for a very important comparison follow the rise of Wal-Mart. in-short, the destruction of one <ahem> Monopoly to have another arise unnoticed, unwatched...unchecked? When you see a Government has a split-personality, there are very bad reasons behind the scenes.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
mvassilev
mvassilev


Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
posted May 27, 2016 10:38 PM

Nuclear weapons are weapons (it's in the name!) and thus designed to be destructive - if they weren't, they'd have been a failure. But most technology is used for productive purposes. We're justifiedly afraid of the wrong people acquiring nuclear capabilities, but this is in no way an unintended consequence, but was expected from the inception of the nuclear program - from the beginning, there was both secrecy and espionage. In contrast, we have no similar reason to fear the automation of manufacturing spreading, because it's not inherently destructive.
It's interesting that you mention nuclear weapons, because even there it's not at all clear that their invention was a bad thing. On one hand, it's true that a lot of resources have been spent on non-proliferation, defense, and so on, not to mention the simple fear. But on the other hand, how many conventional wars between the great powers has it prevented? It's quite possible that nuclear weapons prevented a hot war between the US and Soviet Union, which would've had a lot of casualties. Plus, it opens up the opportunity for easier national defense - there's not as much need for a huge military if you have nukes.
markkur said:
I just told you that they (those very nasty they) are wanting to close down a system that is designed for the people, the masses and not the Elite. Do you really think you are going to be given a robot that will grant you your Utopian wish?
I'm not suggesting that I'm going to be given anything, I'm saying that if the machines are going to be so productive, then buying ownership stakes in them is a good idea, similarly to how people buy shares of companies now. It doesn't require any new policies.
____________
Eccentric Opinion

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Ebonheart
Ebonheart


Famous Hero
Rush the rush
posted May 27, 2016 11:15 PM
Edited by Ebonheart at 23:18, 27 May 2016.

markkur said:


Ebonheart you are wide-awake and thinking...good for you. We are more on the same page than not.

As far as CEOs. <imvho> you really need to look into this topic. AND I was talking about CEOs...not people who are actually creating work. I'll give you a hot-lead; go back to the story of the break-up of AT&T and follow all the trails. And for a very important comparison follow the rise of Wal-Mart. in-short, the destruction of one <ahem> Monopoly to have another arise unnoticed, unwatched...unchecked? When you see a Government has a split-personality, there are very bad reasons behind the scenes.

I see your point Markkur. When I speak of the CEOs in this case I am talking about the small company ones, and they do indeed create jobs. Alas when it comes to the bigger ones, well then everything gets a bit more blurred.
I am also aware of the Walmart history and like you said, we are on the same page. However the fact that governments got hidden agendas, lobbyists influencing a lot etc is nothing new. In my world there is only one solution to stop that, it is called direct democracy and I believe that might be one of the solutions to robots aswell.

As for the nuclear weapons part, I personally believe they are not "good" but still an inevitable upgrade when it comes to explosives. Even though I shudder of the thought of a nuclear incident, for example by terrorists, I fear bio-weapons with plague-like effects even more.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted May 27, 2016 11:50 PM

Ebonheart said:
However, when it comes to nationalism ending, I do not agree. I think the opposite will occur.

At first, there can be some short-termed nationalism as a reaction, actually there already is a lot of reactionary nationalism to globalism as of now. But the way our problems and their potential solutions evolve more and more transnational, nationalism will inevitably cease to be something feasible or operative. It will not be much different than trying to establish tribalism, you just can't.
Markkur said:
Because man (without God) is God and sets no limits to what he will achieve the entire world lived in great fear since 1945, spend untold billions during the cold war and still worries about this TECH falling into the wrong hands.

Well, man with God is not any different, he just does the same things "in the name of God" that's all. Most of those scientists who invented the bomb were atheists or agnostics, yes. (They were smart people, after all) But the politicians who gave the order and the soldiers who executed that order were mostly good ol' Christians such as yourself. Think of Elodin, do you think he would have hesitated to push the button if he was a war pilot in the 40's. Religion never stops anything catastrophic if historical conditions produce it. On the contrary, it sometimes directly creates the conflict or flames it further. Ancient myths and laws our ancestors came up with to solve their own problems wont help us to solve our new ones.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
markkur
markkur


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
posted May 28, 2016 01:57 AM

artu said:
Ancient myths and laws our ancestors came up with to solve their own problems wont help us to solve our new ones.


As usual you are preaching your unbelief to me Artu but really enough; you have to go back to the Crusades to condemn Christianity, having Spain take South American does NOT fully count because anyone with any sense can see that it was all Greed and they only used Religion (after) as broom against what they did not like; what Jesus taught is not in that picture AT ALL .

Look at the 20th century and then tell me belief in God was the main problem in the world. For me, my sitting on the throne of my life offers nothing but temptation and selfishness. I must live a disciplined life and I do by following "The Way" and I am not into Religion at all; it's just a set of Man's "added" rules. Man has messed everything up and the simple message of Christ is only one more example on a huge pile. What institution is working as it was imagined in its infancy? i.e. U.S. Democracy is a mess. Because; GREED is the enemy of all the people...everywhere, except the ones that are infected with it.

Rather please contribute to my discussion about Machines versus Humans, you have a fine mind and surely you have something inside you deeply believe about this topic? Say something like extreme caution not only regarding what might happen but what has happened already that you have witnessed from your part of the world?

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
markkur
markkur


Honorable
Legendary Hero
Once upon a time
posted May 28, 2016 02:10 AM

mvassilev said:
I'm saying that if the machines are going to be so productive, then buying ownership stakes in them is a good idea, similarly to how people buy shares of companies now. It doesn't require any new policies.


I truly do like your optimism but <imo> I think you need to better see the battlefield.

I don't expect you to listen to me but how about someone that has been fighting for the masses since the 1960s?

Ralph Nader: The Corporatization of Your Dreams Part 1 of 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfzNWB_JQmU

Ralph Nader: The Corporatization of Your Dreams Part 2 of 2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjYTcKQKcS8#t=336.3229047

One final thought as an example of what Nadar talked about; I am not an alarmist but I am alarmed.

Seeds...let me say that again "SEEDs for natural food that Mankind has always been able to plant and harvest himself. A Huge Corporation has already patented Seeds that destroy natural seeds. Just that should have everyone here mad as hell and yet are they? Are you?

mvassilev, I've been here long enough to know you can debate very well at times (many here can too) but I think you need to get committed and involved. What role you could play I don't know but <imo> everyone has a responsibility and role to play for the true benefit of mankind. And most often it has or will be one I could never have seen but folks must...care enough to act and not just sit back and wait for some sort of Heaven to arrive in one form or another. Work is the only thing that can bring us closer to that goal.

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
artu
artu


Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
posted May 28, 2016 03:01 AM
Edited by artu at 18:08, 29 May 2016.

Markkur said:
Look at the 20th century and then tell me belief in God was the main problem in the world.

It was rather you who made it sound like not believing in him was the problem of our age. So:
Markkur said:
Rather please contribute to my discussion about Machines versus Humans, you have a fine mind and surely you have something inside you deeply believe about this topic?

I wasn't talking about anything theological additionally until you brought up what you brought up.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost

 Send Instant Message | Send E-Mail | View Profile | Quote Reply | Link
Jump To: « Prev Thread . . . Next Thread » This thread is 6 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 · «PREV / NEXT»
Post New Poll    Post New Topic    Post New Reply

Page compiled in 0.0824 seconds