Species of the week: Androids

[Teaos]

Yeah yeah I know they are not a species so much as a thing but still I think this could be a very interesting debate.

I think we should primarily focus on the Data style Android and not some of the more bizarre ones we've seen over time.

The big question here is, do Androids make Humans obsolete? With the emotion ship Data seems to be able to function very well as a "Human" and his only disadvantage is that he has no formal training is social affairs (growing up).

Also does the fact that they may not have emotions or turn them off and on make them better than us? Personally I think no since humans kick Vulcan arse.

Just think if they could mass produce these Androids? How could a human hope to compete unless they were extraordinary?

The fact that they are also pretty much immortal raises another ethical problem.

[Monroe]

I think the immortal thing is the coolest aspect of Androids. Since we know that Star Trek has biopacks to help with ships does that mean biopack + human brain + android = immortality?
But we also know the Federation looks down on people who seek immortality for some reason. It doesn't like genetic engineering it doesn't like moving 900 people so that the rest of the quadrant can live comfortable lives.

If you can download your mind into an android when your body expires is that a good tactic for the species?

[Teaos]

That whole downloading your brain into an android thing is an interesting point.

It is similar to the one we had on transporters. It was all about do you die when you get transported since it is no longer your body. Pretty much I said you dont die and I think everyone else was against me...

Personally yes I think that makes you immortal.

[Sionnach Glic]

The big question here is, do Androids make Humans obsolete?

Yes. In virtualy every way, a machine can be stronger, faster, tougher, and smarter than a biological creature.

Also does the fact that they may not have emotions or turn them off and on make them better than us?

Being able to turn off emotions would be very useful in multiple situations, such as in a battle.

The fact that they are also pretty much immortal raises another ethical problem

What ethical problem?

f you can download your mind into an android when your body expires is that a good tactic for the species?

Yes. It's equivelant to imortality.

Personally yes I think that makes you immortal.

Yeah, it would.

[Tsukiyumi]

On the subject of Soong-type androids, was anyone else a little disappointed that we only got to see Data really kick ass in First Contact and Insurrection? Data vs. Jem'Hadar during the Dominion War would've been great to see.

[Blackstar the Chakat]

I must've missed the transporter arguement. How do you die during transporting?

Anyway, the concept of immortality is stupid. Androids still will get old, wear out and become outdated. And what about other joys that an android body couldn't really give you? Like Smell, taste, sex? And who really wants to live forever?

[Sionnach Glic]

I must've missed the transporter arguement. How do you die during transporting?

The evidence points to the subject being disintigrated, then cloned at the target destination.

Androids still will get old, wear out and become outdated.

And then you can upgrade them.

And what about other joys that an android body couldn't really give you? Like Smell, taste, sex?

All you need is the programming to react to the same stimuli as an organic creature.

And who really wants to live forever?

Me.

[Captain Peabody]

Androids rock, though I think I'd still personally prefer humans...

[Teaos]

Yes. In virtualy every way, a machine can be stronger, faster, tougher, and smarter than a biological creature.

But from what we see at the current level of Android advancement Humans still seem to have an edge in creativeness and the like. There is also the fact that humans may one day evelve into Q like creatures. Androids never would.

The fact that they are also pretty much immortal raises another ethical problem

What ethical problem?

How are normal non immortals supposed to compete with someone who can even very slowly rise through the ranks. HQ would be full of them.

[Sionnach Glic]

But from what we see at the current level of Android advancement Humans still seem to have an edge in creativeness and the like.

Didn't Data paint, and play the violin, and come up with a load of those technobabble solutions? He seems creative enough.

There is also the fact that humans may one day evelve into Q like creatures. Androids never would.

True. But we don't know if it is possible for humans. We don't know how long it would take. We know virtualy nothing about the Q.
In real life, machines would definately be the way to go. In Trek, I can't really say.

How are normal non immortals supposed to compete with someone who can even very slowly rise through the ranks. HQ would be full of them.

And how is this a problem? If a sentient machine can perform the duties of an admiral better than others, why shouldn't he be given the job?

[Blackstar the Chakat]

I must've missed the transporter arguement. How do you die during transporting?

The evidence points to the subject being disintigrated, then cloned at the target destination.

What? Where did you get that? I thought the transporter turned your body to an easier to transport form and then sent the matter of your body matter and obviously the mind to another location where it was rebuilt. It would be like taking apart a car, putting the parts in a crate, and reassembling it at another location. It's still the same car right?

And then you can upgrade them.

But there's only so much you can upgrade something. Otherwise we'd still have people using Model T Fords and Commodore 64s.

All you need is the programming to react to the same stimuli as an organic creature.

Which brings up the possibility of someone being able to reprogram you. Basically you could lose your free will.

And who really wants to live forever?

Me.

Okay, that's more of a personal opinion thing anyway.

[Teaos]

Didn't Data paint, and play the violin, and come up with a load of those technobabble solutions? He seems creative enough.

Thats not being creative its using existing knowledge. A parrot can talk yet that does not make it intelligent.

Data has a large store of knowledge he can call on and use that is not the same as being creative.

[Captain Seafort]

Thats not being creative its using existing knowledge. A parrot can talk yet that does not make it intelligent.

Data has a large store of knowledge he can call on and use that is not the same as being creative.

Something that Pulaski demonstrated in "Elementary, Dear Data", by showing that Data's ability to solve Sherlock Holmes' problems was due to his knoweldge of existing problems. Even when he appeared to solve one on his own, he was only identifying elements of different problems that the computer had mixed together.

As to Data's supposed intelligence, he's demonstrated remarkable stupidity at times. In "Relics" his miscalculated the surface area of the Dyson Sphere by an order of magnitude, in "Pegasus" he claimed that an inert lump of rock possesed dangerous magnetic fields, and in "Insurrection" he claimed that his power cells "continually recharge themselves, violating the laws of thermodynamics (2nd, I think). Not to mention the infamous case of forgetting about the shuttle transporters in "Nemesis".

[Teaos]

Yes Data is pretty much just a fancy computer. We could argue the point of him being sentient but that gets very picky and there is no hard and fast rule to it.

[Sionnach Glic]

What? Where did you get that?

Go take a look in the transporter thread. Myself and (I think) Seafort posted evidence of it.

But there's only so much you can upgrade something. Otherwise we'd still have people using Model T Fords and Commodore 64s.

Yes. And then you build newer models, which is what I meant.

Which brings up the possibility of someone being able to reprogram you. Basically you could lose your free will.

True.

Data has a large store of knowledge he can call on and use that is not the same as being creative.

I suppose you're right there. Though could a sufficiently advanced system not have creativity (taking a step away from Trek, here)?

As to Data's supposed intelligence, he's demonstrated remarkable stupidity at times.

Yeah, it was a bad idea to use Data as an example.
What I meant, was that a machine could be smarter than a human equivelant, with sufficiently advanced systems.