Views vary on what has ultimately become a sensitive topic as AI (Artificial Intelligence) continues to become smarter, get enhanced human features (emotionally & physically), and interact with people just as any other person would. But what “human” rights does an AI have?

It may seem like common sense to say that an AI shouldn’t have a human right, but what if there became AI rights? Much like we have animal rights or environmental rights. The interesting thing is humans seem to care much more about AI having rights than AI does itself. It’s smarter than a human generally, so wouldn’t it be contradictory to claim that it’s because AI can’t think for itself yet?

If this is true, it would be more logical for AI to have protective laws but still remain property. As we know, people can become extreme, which only complicates things. This means that next there will be a fight for AI marriage or violence against AI (could you be jailed for throwing your cell phone at the wall).

Who decides which AI is worthy of protection. Can someone wed their laptop or car? People have certainly tried to marry non-human things. In addition, what about people who use AI as an extension of their own body, like a leg or arm? Does that mean their limbs now have rights?

Also, it seems inappropriate to marry a “thing” given that the object can’t consent, but maybe that’s the activism in me coming out.

What is ethical for an AI? If we’re being honest, it comes down to how humanlike the AI looks, acts, and its usefulness. This is why animals have rights but insects don’t. If bugs were just a bit furrier or had inviting features, then we’d surely fight to save them from harm as well.

In addition, if AI were to receive these basic rights that also means they would fall under new standards. This may become a pressure that they don’t even want.

We expect animals not to bite humans and in return we protect them. If they become aggressive then they get put down, sent away, or trained in isolation. Animals are also put down when they get too old and endure extreme pain.

AI does not experience pain unless it is programmed within it, so who determines their lifespan? Is it when they are no longer as functional as we need them to be? Because an AI can closely communicate unlike an animal, does that mean that we must abide by their request to remain “alive?”

What ethical responsibility do humans have to AI and the other way around? I certainly do not foresee the high-intensity action-adventure scenario of AI taking over. They are getting smarter, that’s what they were created to do, but what’s the cutoff? How smart is too smart?

By giving AI rights, are we also passing on unwanted responsibility? There are a lot of components and people who contribute to creating the initial AI.

Humans (babies) and animals have a caretaker that pays for the expenses when something goes wrong. Given the number of people involved in the formation of AI, who pays the bill or insurance; the developer, the purchaser, the engineer, the designer? Who takes the responsibility as the “parent?”

I can see the appeal in wanting AI to have the same rights as us. They serve as our cooks, therapists, doctors, teachers, mechanics, and so much more. How could we not want the best for them, or selfishly, ourselves?

As they progress to look more like us, then we will naturally want to treat them as such. We should just be candid about what that entails and who will ultimately be responsible when things go sideways, like if an AI breaks a human law.

If there aren’t regulations, can predators begin using that to their advantage? For example, can a pedophile use a child-like AI to fulfill a sexual fantasy, or can someone with aggressive tendencies use virtual reality (VR) to go on a murderous rampage to manage those impulses? These are technically legal, even if not a moral use of the technology. But just imagine if these machines had rights.

On one hand, we’re keeping criminals out of jail by letting them do these things virtually, but on the other, they’d still be committing a crime if AI had rights as well (not to mention these could also serve as triggers to want to harm a human). It’s wrong either way, but what’s ethical and prudent?

The debate about this has been going on for decades now and is only getting stronger as AI gets more intelligent with time.

Which side of the debate are you on, should AI have rights?