When reading How To Think About Bots, I realized that most of the things that these bots were doing were considered to be human actions. They were buying things of the dark web and acting independently of the humans that made them. That begs the questions can bots be considered independent of their creators? Or maybe even human?
I think these are important questions to ask, especially in the age of rapid progress in AI and bot technology. It might also to be asking certain questions as to the authorship or responsibility of works of literature or actions in a certain situations in which the bot generated literature or bought drugs on the Internet. This idea of authorship relates to my DIG 220 class in which we have pondered whether or not bots should be credited as authors or the people making the bots should.
It is interesting though to explore the responsibility of the bots for buying drugs. For example, in How To Think About Bots says that even though the drugs that were bought were in ownership of the people who made the bots, “our lawyer and the Swiss Constitution say art in the public interest is allowed to be free” (Power). But isn’t this a loophole in the system? Honestly, I don’t think that this should be able to happen legally. It is a sly way to buy the 10 ecstasy pills, which are illegal, but since it was a bot, it is not illegal.
In think that these scenarios illustrate the way in which technology are becoming more and more like human beings in the way that our actions are becoming more and more similar as time passes. My question to you is: should they start to be treated as people?