The page of Charlotte Marosvölgyi 'I am hungry' makes a valid point that it seems that we as humans want to make artificial creatures as human as possible. However, typically, we think machines survive on electricity and algorithms, not the same way we as humans need food and water. This difference in needs makes me wonder about the nature of these artificial beings. Would they seem more alive if they had the same basic needs as us? Or would it blur the line between what's real and what's not, creating new challenges or opportunities? This idea makes me question the definition of life and what it means to be alive. It's not just about technology; it's about understanding the essence of existence.
In addition, like humans, animals also have essential needs, primarily revolving around the necessities of food and water. This made me realize it could actually be useful to create animal-like artificial creatures that replicate real animals and have the same basic needs. Imagine an artificial zoo that serves as an innovative educational platform. Visitors can learn about the needs of these artificial creatures, their digital ecosystems, and how technology plays a role in their 'survival.' Unlike traditional zoos that sometimes compromise the well-being of real animals, this artificial zoo is animal-friendly. The digital nature of these animals in this artificial zoo raises fewer ethical concerns than real animals in captivity.