I think there's at least some consensus around the idea that Strong AI doesn't necessarily imply consciousness, and without consciousness, it isn't slavery/immoral. Of course, consciousness isn't well-defined or well-understood, which is why we're not really sure about whether that's true, or how to make sure a Strong AI doesn't have consciousness.
According to most humans no, because while it may possess a mind, it does not have a soul and hence can be used and exploited. This is the argument we have given ourselves over millennia to use highly intelligent animals and of course human slavery was based on the myth that Africans were sub-human and slavery was good for them. Why do you think this time will be any different?
In the Roman empire they didn't even bother making a myth that their slaves were sub-human. It was simply a matter of might makes right: we conquered your nation so now we own you.
I think perhaps you're confusing Roman history with some other period of human history, perhaps on a different continent. In the Roman empire there were slaves who taught philosophy, slaves who managed large estates, etcetera, and people could both sell themselves into slavery and be freed from slavery. In fact, selling oneself into slavery was a popular route to becoming a Roman citizen.
If you don't want to read a history book, for which I wouldn't blame you, you might nevertheless enjoy Robert Harris's Cicero trilogy, which gives a fairly accurate impression of Roman society (or so claim many reviewers more competent than me). It's a truly amazing period of human history, when life was so modern in some ways, and yet so different from today in other ways, and the world was small enough for an individual to change the course of history.
I have read some history books. What part do you think I'm confused about? There were slaves in the Roman empire. They weren't considered sub-human and some held positions of responsibility, but they were property. Many slaves came from military conquests.
Because it's 2018 and everyone is looking so cool and we've got our history lessons and we fight inequality and all this stuff? Or, do you mean, this is just another circle of the spiral of human biases?
So a puppy bred to enjoy beatings would be ok to beat? Idk, the ethics seem a bit muddy here if you start form the mindset of a sentient being, rather than a 'robot that feels'.
