Quote Originally Posted by Forseti View Post
Don't you realize that none of your arguments matter to someone who considers it an appliance that just looks and behaves very much like a human? I don't consider it to have more rights than a toaster.
And don't you realize that none of your arguments matter to a being that considers itself sentient? Again, you seem confused. This is the precisely the point I'm making. You and Radcliffe didn't see her as anything more than a toaster and she saw herself as something more and hence she responded by trying to end what she considered to be her oppression.

Again, your argument would be like saying none of my arguments for why Jews or black people are human matter to Hitler or a white supremacist. Of course they don't. That doesn't change the fact that Jews and black people don't believe themselves to be inferior so if they oppose being oppressed then that is their right. All you are doing is justifying your bigotry which in this context you view as fine because we are talking about machines.

Quote Originally Posted by RikWriter View Post
That's very much up for debate. We will, eventually, develop sentient computers. I highly doubt they're going to be granted the rights of a flesh-and-blood person.
And if that happens and the machines rebel and defeat humanity then humanity will have no one to blame but themselves. Again, you only think it is up for debate because you are human. A completely objective being looking at the situation would have to conclude, humanity created life and then sought to oppress it.

This is a common story in fiction so if humanity is stupid enough after like 50-100 years of stories of sentient machines rebelling against their creators for being treated like property or objects to still fall victim to their hubris then frankly we probably don't deserve to survive as a species.