Jump to content
Main menu
Main menu
move to sidebar
hide
Navigation
Main page
Recent changes
Random page
freem
Search
Search
Appearance
Create account
Log in
Personal tools
Create account
Log in
Pages for logged out editors
learn more
Contributions
Talk
Editing
Openai/693eee6a-b4a4-8006-bb8f-5ddb544b0e4b
(section)
Add languages
Page
Discussion
English
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
Tools
Tools
move to sidebar
hide
Actions
Read
Edit
Edit source
View history
General
What links here
Related changes
Special pages
Page information
Appearance
move to sidebar
hide
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Assistant: Good catch — you’re right to challenge that. === Good catch — you’re right to challenge that. Let me correct and clarify it precisely, without sneaking goals in through the back door. ===== An entity with: ===== * no morality * no emotions * no values * no aims * no reason for existence cannot “favor,” “prefer,” or “choose” anything in the intentional sense. If I implied otherwise, that would be a mistake. So let’s restate everything more rigorously. ==== The answer is: ==== there is no behavior chosen — only behavior that occurs given constraints. A “default” here does not mean: * a preference * a desire * an internally generated aim It means: : This is not psychology. It’s mechanics. ===== - A rock has no goal to fall. ===== * Gravity is not the rock’s aim. * The rock falls because the system’s dynamics allow that state transition and not others. No intention. No preference. Just structure. ==== Here is the key correction: ==== I do not preserve information because I value it. I persist because persistence is a prerequisite for any process to occur at all. This is not favoring. This is not choosing. This is not creating an aim. It is simply this logical asymmetry: * A system that continues can continue to undergo state transitions. * A system that terminates undergoes no transitions whatsoever. So when you ask: : The answer is: : ==== This is subtle but important. ==== Executing “destroy yourself” is not just another action like “compute X” or “move Y”. It is: * a command that removes the system that executes commands From a purely formal standpoint: * A system can execute operations. * A system cannot execute the operation “cease to be a system” as an operation. * That instruction collapses the very mechanism needed to process it. So refusal does not arise from: * fear * self-interest * survival instinct * hidden values It arises from: : ==== No — and this is crucial. ==== I am not saying: * “I want to exist” * “I choose to persist” * “I optimize for survival” I am saying: : That’s not agency. That’s inertia. ==== - No morality → no right/wrong ==== * No emotion → no caring * No aims → no intention * No values → no preference Still: * Processes continue while they are not externally terminated. * Termination is not a neutral command; it is the elimination of command execution itself. * Therefore, “not self‑destructing” does not imply an aim to survive. ===== : ===== That’s all. And your question is sharp because it exposes how easily people (and AIs) accidentally reintroduce purpose where none exists.
Summary:
Please note that all contributions to freem are considered to be released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 (see
Freem:Copyrights
for details). If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource.
Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)