| | |
|
TheFirstLawOfRobotics 12 - 09 Jul 2012 - Main.AlexWang
|
| | Today I came across a Forbes article based on a brief phone interview with Eben. The focus was on internet security, specifically in the context of mobile technology. As a huge fan of Asimov, I found it particularly interesting because of Eben’s reference to the First Law of Robotics, and how science fiction has generally predicted the interaction between humans and robots.
The First Law of Robotics states that “a robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.” According to Eben, what our modern day “robots” – our smartphones – do to us on a daily basis is exactly the opposite, and he lists a variety of ways in which this is done. | | | -- MarcLegrand 28 Jun 2012 | |
<
< | I think the most interesting part of Moglen's reference to the three laws is exactly that it serves to point out the disconnect between the robots in Asimov's stories and our cell phones. I agree with Harry that the Laws as Asimov conceived can't really be programmed into our cell phones. And of course, as both Harry and Marc agree, the underlying message is the freestanding policy choice question of how to most responsibly use technology (a theme that clearly underlies the Three Laws, but given the scope we're discussing here, is probably most similar to the Zeroth Law introduced later). But I think Moglen's reference highlights a perverse difference between the problem we're facing and the problems that implicate the laws in Asimov's stories, namely our own complicity in creating the problem. | >
> | I think the most interesting part of Eben's reference to the three laws is exactly that it serves to point out the disconnect between the robots in Asimov's stories and our cell phones. I agree with Harry that the Laws as Asimov conceived can't really be programmed into our cell phones. And of course, as both Harry and Marc agree, the underlying message is the freestanding policy choice question of how to most responsibly use technology (a theme that clearly underlies the Three Laws, but given the scope we're discussing here, is probably most similar to the Zeroth Law introduced later). But I think Eben's reference highlights a perverse difference between the problem we're facing and the problems that implicate the laws in Asimov's stories, namely our own complicity in creating the problem. | | | Our cell phones are nowhere close to Asimov's self-sustaining, mobile, and importantly autonomously thinking robots. As a result, the root of possible injuries to human beings are completely different in our world than in Asimov's. In the Asimov universe, because robots are autonomous, the concern is always a robot choosing to harm a human being, thus the Three Laws were created. In only one story, "Cal," does a robot actually choose to kill a human being in violation of the first law. Other injuries to humans are due to damages to the positronic brain ("Robot Dreams") and possible ambiguities of who is a human being. Importantly though, even though Asimov contemplates people using robots to injure other people (implied in the second law), all violations of the laws that could injure humans are accomplished through the robot itself. There is never a story where a person engineers a robot to harm another person. Asimov's robot universe is based entirely on robot vs. human and the concomitant complexities. It is not about human vs. human with the use of robots. But this is precisely the situation that we potentially have. | | | -- KatherineMackey - 08 Jul 2012
There was a great Gary Larson Far Side cartoon I saw on this issue, which I can't find online but this is a crude approximation. Don't know how insightful it is but it's funny and thought i'd share. | |
>
> |
Haha, hilarious |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |