The new humans vs. robots debate: introducing the FH Prize

[kdavis007]

The new humans vs. robots debate: introducing the FH Prize<br />by Michael Huang<br />Monday, February 13, 2006<br /><br />The old “humans vs. robots” debate is very familiar to newspaper editorial writers: robots are better than humans, therefore robots should be in space and humans should not. But there is a new humans vs. robots debate that is being overlooked. The outcome of this new debate will have a decisive influence on space policy.<br /><br />The old humans vs. robots debate is about the merits of human spaceflight. Everyone agrees that robots should be in space, so the only contentious issue is whether humans should be up there: pro-human-spaceflight vs. anti-human-spaceflight. This is where the new debate comes in. The new debate observes that:<br /><br />Anti-human-spaceflight activists are human.<br /><br />Why is this obvious fact important? It’s important because humans are saying that robots are better than humans. Humans are arguing that robots should replace humans. This doesn’t make any sense. It’s self-defeating and hypocritical for humans to argue against themselves. If robots are so good, and humans are so bad, then why are humans doing all the talking? If a human believes that robots are better than humans, then the first thing that human should do is replace himself or herself with a robot. In short, anti-human humans do not make any sense; anti-human robots make perfect sense.<br /><br />The new humans vs. robots debate is this: should humans or robots be in the anti-human-spaceflight movement?<br />Some might say that replacing anti-human-spaceflight humans with robots is impractical or ridiculous. However, it is at least equally impractical and ridiculous to replace all human life beyond Earth with robots. In fact, replacing humans here on Earth is much cheaper than replacing humans beyond Earth, since the cost of putting anything into space is extremely high. It’s also worth remembering that anti-human-spaceflight robots do not need to be autonomous.

 

[kdavis007]

Very good article...

 

[egom]

Indeed!

 

[craig42]

Almost too good. Have you ever taken a turing test <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

 

[j05h]

That sure puts a smile on my Monday face...<br /><br />I'm picturing the robot from Short Circuit facing off against a red-faced Rick Tumlinson, maybe with Burt or Elon looking on in shock...<br /><br />Josh <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <div align="center"><em>We need a first generation of pioneers.</em><br /></div> </div>

 

[josh_simonson]

I could see Bender participating and Nixon's head officiating. <img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />

 

[lunatic133]

Brilliant! Whoever wrote this is my new hero. Just like Cylons in Battlestar Galactica -- humans are fallible, let's blow them up! *snicker*