shadeyinka5:

The only intelligence in your brain is to be rude and caustic.
Good day!

You are still dumb

HenryDion:


You are still dumb

10,000 miles after you

CAPSLOCKED:


WELL, THERE ARE HUMANS IN THE WORLD, UNLESS WE MAKE BLIND AND INSENSITIVE ROBOTS, THERE'S NO WAY THE ROBOTS WON'T SEE US, OR FEEL US, OR INTERACT WITH US AND GET COMMANDS DIRECTLY FROM US.
IN THE CASE OF RELIGION THE ONLY COMMAND PEOPLE GET FROM GODS ARE THE THINGS THEY (PEOPLE) MAKE UP IN THEIR HEADS THEMSELVES.

THIS IS A TERRIBLE EXCUSE AND A SHIITY DEFENCE FOR YOUR STONE AGE GOD.. WHO IS SAID TO BE IN EXISTENCE BUT CANNOT DEFEND HIMSELF.

Whatever!
No allegory is a perfect 1:1 match with reality.

Does every robot have eyes?
Do robots need eyes to be robots?


I'll invite you when I have your time!

frank317:

Yes, one of "my" guys says robots can see humans, that's going by the allegory "ur" guy made.

If ur guys allegory that robots are capable of determining who their creator is, why wouldn't they be able to see? And if humans are around them like we are, why won't they see us.

Are u arguing for argument sake?



It does my brother... If robots are conscious enough to determine if humans are or are not their creator... That means they would be able to see us because we are already here interacting with them.

Does every robot have eyes?
Do robots need eyes to be robots?

shadeyinka5:

Whatever!
No allegory is a perfect 1:1 match with reality.

Does every robot have eyes?
Do robots need eyes to be robots?


I'll invite you when I have your time!

Allegories are meant to illustrate certain things, this one fails to illustrate anything.

LordReed:


Allegories are meant to illustrate certain things, this one fails to illustrate anything.

Your opinion!

shadeyinka5:

Does every robot have eyes?
Do robots need eyes to be robots?

You know u have lost the plot when u start using dumb arguments like this.
"Seeing" in this sense is the ability to perceive something. So it doesn't have to do with eyes. Any perceptive sensory instrument will do. We know bats can "see" with sounds and are able to tell both predator and prey.
So a robot in this sense should be able to see its maker the way it is able to see its surroundings. It should be able to tell causes and effects apart. Robots can even be programmed to obey only certain voice commands from certain people.

It's really hard watching dumb people argue nonsense like u are now. The problem is that u don't even know when to stop. Lol

NPComplete:


You know u have lost the plot when u start using dumb arguments like this.
"Seeing" in this sense is the ability to perceive something. So it doesn't have to do with eyes. Any perceptive sensory instrument will do. We know bats can "see" with sounds and are able to tell both predator and prey.
So a robot in this sense should be able to see its maker the way it is able to see its surroundings. It should be able to tell causes and effects apart. Robots can even be programmed to obey only certain voice commands from certain people.

It's really hard watching dumb people argue nonsense like u are now. The problem is that u don't even know when to stop. Lol

It was a yes or no question please!

shadeyinka5:

It was a yes or no question please!

Lol. Let me indulge since today is a weekend and I don't have much to do.

Yes every robot needs eyes if they are the kind of robots in the OP premise. Robots that can discover humans and even plot about overthrowing them. It seems u just agreed with the OP without reading it.
Eyes don't have to be human eyes. Or even anything that senses light. It just has to be anything that allows the robots to tell themselves apart from those humans they are plotting to overthrow.

NPComplete:


Lol. Let me indulge since today is a weekend and I don't have much to do.

Yes every robot needs eyes if they are the kind of robots in the OP premise. Robots that can discover humans and even plot about overthrowing them. It seems u just agreed with the OP without reading it.
Eyes don't have to be human eyes. Or even anything that senses light. It just has to be anything that allows the robots to tell themselves apart from those humans they are plotting to overthrow.

If the allegory would have to be close to reality, the robots may have light sensors but not eyes. A robot having Light sensors doesn't automatically confer ability to visualize. Isn't this true?

shadeyinka5:

If the allegory would have to be close to reality, the robots may have light sensors but not eyes. A robot having Light sensors doesn't automatically confer ability to visualize. Isn't this true?

Jesus Christ man!!!! Just stop already. Arguing pointlessly is not a virtue.
If they can't visualize, how can they plot to overthrow?

I just like OpenYourEyes1. He makes a lot of senseless threads that usually go unnoticed until he tries to draw attention to them. Once he gets the attention and the bashing and logical dismantling that comes with it, he quickly realises that his thread is senseless and crawls back to hide.

The unfortunate thing about him is that it takes less than 2 days for him to repeat the cycle.

shadeyinka5:

Your opinion!

As you can see it is a lot more than my opinion, others have voiced similar concerns.

NPComplete:


Jesus Christ man!!!! Just stop already. Arguing pointlessly is not a virtue.
If they can't visualize, how can they plot to overthrow?

Using their intelligence and brute strength!

shadeyinka5:

Using their intelligence and brute strength!

Just negodu this guy. Hahahaha.

So u can use intelligence and strength without being able to visualise and perceive the target to locate it and know when u have achieve the aim? How does intelligence work without sensory perception? How can a tiger run another tiger out of its territory without being able to visualize the extent of its territory and when the other tiger is out of it?

Laugh wan kill me here. I am done with u jare. It is obvious thinking isn't one of your strong suites. I have no intention of being dragged along in a senseless argument where the opposition refuses to employ any iota of what can even be likened to sense. I have always suspected u are a very dumb person and it's not religion that's responsible for your handicap. U have been like that naturally. Now I am very sure.

Bye!!!

NPComplete:


Just negodu this guy. Hahahaha.

So u can use intelligence and strength without being able to visualise and perceive the target to locate it and know when u have achieve the aim? How does intelligence work without sensory perception? How can a tiger run another tiger out of its territory without being able to visualize the extent of its territory and when the other tiger is out of it?

Laugh wan kill me here. I am done with u jare. It is obvious thinking isn't one of your strong suites. I have no intention of being dragged along in a senseless argument where the opposition refuses to employ any iota of what can even be likened to sense. I have always suspected u are a very dumb person and it's not religion that's responsible for your handicap. U have been like that naturally. Now I am very sure.

Bye!!!

It's the need to defend the god, it forces them to employ all manner of metal gymnastics just to maintain their beliefs. Even when they are aware of how crazy it sounds they plunge on because to pause and reflect will destroy that belief.

LordReed:


It's the need to defend the god, it forces them to employ all manner of metal gymnastics just to maintain their beliefs. Even when they are aware of how crazy it sounds they plunge on because to pause and reflect will destroy that belief.

That guy's inability to use rudimentary logic saddens me bro. It's as if something compels him to just keep churning out nonsense upon nonsense without thinking at all.

I applaud anyone who has patience to engage such people continuously.

shadeyinka5:

Whatever!
No allegory is a perfect 1:1 match with reality.

Does every robot have eyes?
Do robots need eyes to be robots?


I'll invite you when I have your time!

A robot must be able to interact and follow commands anything aside that is just a woody doll.

The OP premise painted a robot evolving in intelligence and conciousness.

tintingz:
A robot must be able to interact and follow commands anything aside that is just a woody doll.

The OP premise painted a robot evolving in intelligence and conciousness.

Intelligence isn't exclusive to people with sight.
Do you disagree?

NPComplete:


Just negodu this guy. Hahahaha.

So u can use intelligence and strength without being able to visualise and perceive the target to locate it and know when u have achieve the aim? How does intelligence work without sensory perception? How can a tiger run another tiger out of its territory without being able to visualize the extent of its territory and when the other tiger is out of it?

Laugh wan kill me here. I am done with u jare. It is obvious thinking isn't one of your strong suites. I have no intention of being dragged along in a senseless argument where the opposition refuses to employ any iota of what can even be likened to sense. I have always suspected u are a very dumb person and it's not religion that's responsible for your handicap. U have been like that naturally. Now I am very sure.

Bye!!!

Sorry for yourself.
Sarcasm doesn't change anything. It's just a way to hide mental inadequacies!

NPComplete:


That guy's inability to use rudimentary logic saddens me bro. It's as if something compels him to just keep churning out nonsense upon nonsense without thinking at all.

I applaud anyone who has patience to engage such people continuously.

I do too, it can be pretty frustrating.

shadeyinka5:

Intelligence isn't exclusive to people with sight.
Do you disagree?

Sigh.

shadeyinka5:

Sorry for yourself.
Sarcasm doesn't change anything. It's just a way to hide mental inadequacies!

Lol. This guy daft sha. U better go and get a dictionary and learn what sarcasm means. So the holy spirit u claim to have didn't tell u there is nothing remotely close to sarcasm in that post abi? Lol

If u spent a tenth of the time u use in arguing senselessly on nairaland to really study, by now u will have been able to identify when a post is sarcastic and when it isn't. Swerve.

NPComplete:


Lol. This guy daft sha . U better go and get a dictionary and learn what sarcasm means. So the holy spirit u claim to have didn't tell u there is nothing remotely close to sarcasm in that post abi? Lol

If u spent a tenth of the time u use in arguing senselessly on nairaland to really study, by now u will have been able to identify when a post is sarcastic and when it isn't. Swerve.

The thing pain you!?

Can you see how your uncultured nature reeks about?

tintingz:
Sigh.

You need it!!

shadeyinka5:

Intelligence isn't exclusive to people with sight.
Do you disagree?

Will the robots be able to sense where the humans are?

LordReed:


Will the robots be able to sense where the humans are?

Not necessarily!
Their normal sensory perception could detect signatures such as heat and sound but direct remote perception is out of it.

shadeyinka5:

Not necessarily!
Their normal sensory perception could detect signatures such as heat and sound but direct remote perception is out of it.

So as humans emit sound and heat they'll be able to detect those right?

LordReed:


So as humans emit sound and heat they'll be able to detect those right?

Of course!

shadeyinka5:

Of course!

So what exactly is your objection? They can sense humans by heat and sound yet when we ask you that can they sense humans you say not necessarily. I don't understand what you are objecting to.

LordReed:


So what exactly is your objection? They can sense humans by heat and sound yet when we ask you that can they sense humans you say not necessarily. I don't understand what you are objecting to.

See how you twist things!

shadeyinka5:

Not necessarily!
Their normal sensory perception could detect signatures such as heat and sound but direct remote perception is out of it.

shadeyinka5:

See how you twist things!

Twist what? I am not seeing what you are objecting to if you believe they can detect humans by heat and sound. They are detecting humans simple, what is the not necessarily inside it again?