Experience Tumblr like never before
Ethics - Blog Posts
the worse climate disaster gets, the more you’ll see closet eugenicists start to advocate for letting people die. you need to be prepared to combat the ideology wherever you see it, because it’s only going to get worse and worse Read everything having to do with climate disaster critically. If the central argument underlying what’s being said is that the death of disabled and/or racialized people is inevitable, natural, or desirable– that’s a fascist.
they might be appear to be a garden variety republican or liberal or even a leftist at first, but know that if that argument is being made, their underlying ideology is one of supremacism, and given additional climate stress, they will become more blatant about it.
"ai is making it so everyone can make art" Everyone can make art dipshit it came free with your fucking humanity
Henrik Ibsen's Puphejmo-A Doll's House
PREACH!!
As an AFAB (still identify on the feminine part of the gender spectrum) person who got SA’d on multiple different occasions (5, 7, and 11 years old for the cases where I or the perpetrator weren’t fully clothed, there were other occasions though, but they didn’t really affect me as much) And tend to fear falling in love with people, even if I trust them: Being pregnant is scary in any case, whether you want to keep the pregnancy or not, it’s terrifying.
To any ‘pro lifers’ (more so pro-birth) or people who are confused or uneducated about pregnancy and birth:
•Pregnancy puts the person’s life at risk, and permanently affects the body even after the baby is born.
•non viable pregnancies can be mentally and physically devastating for people involved, and should be aborted for the pregnant person’s safety.
•Non viable pregnancies include: if a newborn is guaranteed to die after birth, stillborns, fetuses with severe defects, the pregnant person definitely not going to survive giving birth (such as children that are pregnant, people with severe health issues, some intersex and trans people, etc), and more
•if abortion was only allowed if the pregnancy was caused by SA/R@pe, many people who were SA’d/R@ped wouldn’t be able to get abortions anyway, because most SA/R@pe cases don’t get reported, aren’t brought to court, are deemed false by court, etc.
•There is a difference between life and personhood. Plants are alive, but don’t have personhood. A human corpse isn’t alive, but has personhood. A fetus is technically alive, but isn’t a person.
•if you think abortion is murder because a fetus has life, then farming is murder, picking mushrooms or roots is murder, taking antibiotics and getting vaccinated would be murder because bacteria and viruses are alive.
•Abortion is healthcare. An established life of a person is more important than a fetus with no personhood or consciousness.
Have some memes for your travels:
the "I believe in abortion only in extreme situations" people (especially women) truly baffle me because I genuinely consider "a human has another human growing inside of them and does not want to" to be a very extreme situation. to me that feels so deeply like an extreme emergency situation. I know this has been said before but it's incredible to me that this does not feel innately horrifying and "extreme" to everyone.
Yup! 🔥
you know how people talk about seeing in black and white and when things are more complicated or nuanced then they say its grey? yeah i kinda hate that. life is so much more than greyscale.
i like to think about life in rainbow thank you very much.
i dont believe that the scale of right and wrong, good and bad, is linear. people are SO complicated and the scope of what is possible is enormous.
when we talk about complex topics like politics, trauma, ethics, diversity and disability there are countless factors to consider. youre telling me that makes it grey??? 😭 nonono that makes it a unique blend of all the colours of the rainbow depending on the persons entire lifes worth of experiences.
this dont mean you can excuse your actions by saying its complicated, it can be complicated and still be wrong this is just about readjusting grey to colours
anyways when someone does something you disagree with, instead of trying to think in shades of grey, consider the endless amounts of possibilities there are to create a unique painting of colours representing this persons experiences.
think in colour peeps 🌈
no because it just absolutely enrages me when people consider themselves a “freedom fighter” or an “activist” or whatever the fuck you wanna call it.
but then they dont apply that to all minorities.
why is one minority less worthy than the other?
YouTube recently made waves by announcing a new policy requiring disclosure of AI-generated content. As AI becomes increasingly sophisticated at creating eerily lifelike media, platforms face big questions about transparency and trust.
In my latest blog post, I dive into the implications of YouTube's controversial new mandate. What are the pros and cons of forcing creators to reveal when AI lends a hand? Will this promote accountability or stifle innovation?
The policy brings to light fascinating ethical tensions as society grapples with AI's expanding creative capabilities. From identity theft to misinformation, unchecked AI has risks. But implemented thoughtfully, it also has amazing potential to push the boundaries of digital media.
YouTube aims to balance emerging technology with human values like consent and truth. But as AI-assisted artistry gets more beguiling, maintaining that equilibrium won't be easy.
Where should we draw the line between AI magic and deception? What role should ethics play in AI development? This policy opens up big questions - and debates - about our AI-powered future.
To read my full analysis on YouTube's impactful new rules, check out the link in my bio. Let me know your thoughts!
miss le guin wrote an antiwar, anti-fear, anticapitalist book about physically inuit-coded agender space beings with a black man scientist protag who narrates in first person and falls in gay love with the most noble interesting 4-dimensional alien.. in 1969
no excuses from those who write fantasy in 2018
“In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others. In ethics he is guilty if he only thinks of doing so” - Immanuel Kant
So.
Androids are my special interest so i’ve been following discussion about them and development of them for almost ten years and I’m stupid passionate about it. If anyone is wondering where we are at in our ethical discussion of robot development, this is whats going on.
Most of the discussion seems to be between these 5 fields:
Robot makers of all kinds (from animatronics all the way to industrial robotics) Psychologists Sociologists Lawyers/Lawmakers Ethicists
The general consensus has been:
All: Humanity clearly wants these robots and are getting blisteringly close to being able to build them to Chobits level, but not Blade Runner level, so while we have some free time between those phases lets talk about potential outcomes.
Psychologists: hem hem. we are concerned about what happens to the way we develop relationships. Humans imprint on things hardcore and because of this we are concerned.
Sociologists: I mean… yeah thats a concern, but its not nearly as concerning as what introducing an entire class of humanoid beings without rights to a society where real living people dont have rights
Lawyers: speaking of rights, what happens if you kill one. Like. do we call it “kill” or is it “break?” can you kill something that’s technically not alive??? what if you rape it?? Can you rape a robot? I feel lawsuits coming and its making me itchy.
Robot Makers: Everyone calm down. They’re just objects, they’re toys. Its chill.. See, we’ll make something like it and see what hap–they broke it. they fuckin destroyed it. They destroyed it in a creepy way too….We are now also concerned.
Psychologists: Maybe we should be less concerned about people falling in love with robots and more concerned about what all this might do to their understanding of the disposability of concent and personhood.
Sociologists: YEAH MAYBE YOU SHOULD BE, PSYCHOLOGIST.
Ethicist: While you were all talking I’ve been thinking about what Lawyer said about raping a robot. While technically it wouldn’t be “rape” by our laws, would the robot perceive it that way? Do robots have concepts of justice?
Robot Makers: They don’t if we don’t program it into them. See I’ll just make this prototype and–wow. it can comprehend fairness and concern. I only taught it the difference between a safe and unsafe situation under the circumstances of it rolling off a table or not. huh. uh. ok…thats. hm.
Lawyers: If it can be concerned for its well being, does that give it personhood? Becuase if its got personhood, its gotta have rights. And if it needs rights, we gotta make laws.
Ethicist: The question is not whether we think it has personhood, but more whether IT considers ITSELF to have personhood. Because historically, people have decided other groups of people dont have personhood regardless of the opinon of individuals within that group and it was bad. Like… real bad.
Sociologist: Does anyone remember what i said 20 years ago about being concerned about introducing an entire class of humanoid beings without rights to a society where real living people don’t have rights? Can we be concerned about that now?
All, chagrined: Yes.
Sociologist: Cool, lets move on. Ethicist brought up an interesting point about personhood and Lawyer brought up an interesting threat about personhood and Robot Maker is having an existential crisis about what it means to become God. So let’s condense our viewpoints and overview potential consequences:
1. we agree that society frames the use and consequences of all products/entities developed in it.
2. personhood is self-defined, and thanks to Robot Maker we now know that adding components to a robot that seem benign can have the added effect of them developing aspects of personhood.
Robot Maker, interrupting: And I think that the more complex the android, the more immediate and complex their understanding of personhood would develop–
Sociologist: Yes, we get that. This is a review. Anyway, 3. When they develop that personhood, they should be eligible for rights??
Lawyer: Get back to us on that, we’re trying to figure out whether this is going to make us a lot of money or just be a giant red-tape headache and you know how much we hate those. But also, if we give them rights they might not kill us all later, so we’re taking that into consideration.
Sociologist: Noted. 4. when they develop personhood, denying them rights is unethical????
Ethicist: Technically yes, but that’s dependant on the definition of personhood within our legal systems ethics. You see Kant believes–
Sociologist:
Psychologist:
Robot Maker: while you guys were talking I made a robot that has opinions, can understand the nuances of humor, can teach itself to walk, and also doesn’t like humans much apparently so can you tALK FASTER PLEASE
And that’s where we’re at now. That was 35-ish years of intracommunity discussion condensed.
Wildlife tourism isn’t always a more ethical choice.
I often see people who are under the assumption that wildlife tourism is free from ethical concerns, or that it’s inherently a more ethical choice than visiting a zoo/aquarium.
Wildlife tourism encompasses a wide variety of activities that involves watching wildlife in engage with their natural habitat. This includes safaris, whale watching, birding, photography tours, and a host of other activities. Wildlife tourism by itself can be an ethical way to see wildlife, however that is not always the case. There’s actively many harmful parts of wildlife tourism, that people may overlook since the animals are “free.”
So.. what would be some examples of unethical wildlife tourism?
- Whale petting in Baja Mexico. This activity actively contributes to the habituation of whales and disrupts their natural behaviors. Habituated whales are at a higher risk of encountering boat strikes - which can lead to physical injury or even death.
- Fake/bad acting sanctuaries. Sanctuaries are not always ethical, and many advertise activities such as elephant rides, elephant bathing, and advocate for people to touch/hold animals. The training methods they often utilize use fear or coercion, this is often actively stressful to the animals, and can be particularly dangerous to the tourists engaging with these animals.
- Swimming with whales. Studies show that commercial swim with whale tours can negatively impact the behaviors of some baleen whale species. These behaviors include avoidance and decreased rest time.
Spoiler: Injured wildlife
Is there ethical wildlife tourism?
Absolutely! Wildlife tourism should be done with respect for the animals. There should be careful steps taken to avoid habituation and harassment of wildlife.
Some of my favorite options include visiting a national park, bird watching, and doing careful research to find ethical whale watching companies. Additionally, many AZA accredited zoos offer animal interactions that are done in a safe & non-stressful manner for the animals. These may even include giraffe feedings and up close educational encounters.
Chat, is it unethical for me to use AI to roleplay?
I wanna explain myself for a minute. Disclaimer: I do NOT fuck with AI for creative spaces. I don't really like AI. I actually kind of had an argument about this with my creative writing teacher, who's super into AI "art." Like I try to keep it away from me at all times for school, art, and literature because 1. It's garbage, 2. It steals from artists, and 3. A bitch wants to be able to think for herself, y'know?
Anyway, so onto my reason. Why do I roleplay with AI bots instead of people? Because I have Generalized Anxiety Disorder and that makes certain stuff real difficult for me. But the main reason as to why I use AI for this stuff is because I want to act out extremely sexual and kinky things that I want to experiment one day. It doesn't sit right with me to NSFW rp or do ERP with a stranger online. I worry about being violated, taken advantage of, doxxed, stalked, or possibly worse. Also, I have never dated anyone. I have never been on an actual date before. I'm only 18, and the thought of acting out explicit sexual fantasies with someone online who could very well be twice my age (despite swearing to me that they're 18) or worse, be a minor in the ERP space pretending to be my age (I knew some people at 14 yrs old who did that kinda stuff) does NOT sit right with me at all!
My romance experiences over the years:
Some girl that lasted for a few weeks online who I met once IRL. I was 14.
My childhood best friend was my first ever real love. We were 14, and it fizzled out. We're still best friends, but we aren't romantically attracted to each other anymore.
A guy who was an asshole and did some questionable shit. I was 16, we reconnected now and he has proven that he has changed but I'm still wary.
A guy who took me to homecoming at 17 years old who led me on. Things weren't gonna happen because of cultural barriers and cuz his parents were classist. He was Malaysian and upper middle-class to upper class. I'm Korean, Puerto Rican, German, and lower middle-class. Hence why it didn't work out. I hold nothing against him at all, I'm just explaining why things flopped. His family wanted a girl of his race of his class and I was neither.
Mind you, none of these people were ever actual dates or lovers. Now a list of the farthest I ever got physically with someone:
I got kissed on the cheek when I was 13 or 14 at a sleepover after begging someone--anyone--to do it. Game is game ig little bro💀
Kissed childhood best friend on the hand at 14 yrs old.
Cuddled childhood best friend at 14 years old
Held hands with childhood best friend at 15 yrs old
Held hands with previously mentioned guy at 17 yrs old
Same guy placed his jacket around me.
Placed head on someone's shoulder
Hugged various people.
See that? See how on the list there's not a single date, let alone a kiss, let alone sex? So why the FUCK would I share the most intimate and kinky things I fantasize about to a rando online?
Like... it's been on my mind for a minute. But as someone who hates AI, I do admit that I use it for ERP mostly because I don't feel comfortable interacting with people online in a sexual context when I have never even had a real date before.
Is that valid...?
Okay I’m pretty anti Christianity in general because of my upbringing, but I fully believe the phrase, “then go and sin no more” is one of the most powerful statements of moral philosophy in the history of the world
As Humans we lose parts of our humanity when we use ourselves or others for the gratification of the self. It is only a loss when we enable sorrow, anger, avarice and profit-seeking behaviors. (These and many other things)
When we sow those seeds the fruit they bare are only novelties, baubles, and tchotchkes. Quite frankly they are an insult to the worth and efforts of the human spirit.