Timeline for How would Asiimov's "Three Laws of Robotics" be enforced effectively for robots built by private companies? [closed]
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
19 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 14, 2018 at 1:30 | comment | added | Justin Thyme | If I remember right, the penalty for not incorporating them into any unit used around humans was death. I remember a story about the robot revolutions, and the origins of these laws. The robots were banned from earth, ostracized to automated colonies, until these processors were developed.. | |
| Oct 14, 2018 at 1:25 | comment | added | Justin Thyme | Each had one and only one of three functions, in hierarchical order: to ensure that the robot's action or inaction would not cause a human harm; to ensure that the robot followed a human command; and to ensure its own survival. These three processors acted independently of the (quantum) probability unit that made the general decisions. It was mandated that these three units be 'hard wired' into every robot, in order for the industry to gain permission for robots to be used on earth. Failure to do so resulted in severe penalties for the manufacturer. This was clearly outlined in his stories. | |
| Oct 14, 2018 at 1:17 | comment | added | Justin Thyme | Asimov's positronic brain was not a digital computer, nor was it in any way related to current technology. If anything, it was a quantum computer that used probabilities. We are just developing algorithms useable by quantum computing. The Three Laws were not part of the programming, they were each a separate filter, always working between the robots' decisions and its actions. Sort of like our frontal lobes and cerebral cortex. They were, in today's terms, separate purpose-built processors that was hard wired into the final decision stage. | |
| Oct 12, 2018 at 1:03 | history | closed |
Mołot elemtilas user535733 JohnWDailey rek |
Needs more focus | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 22:30 | comment | added | Shadowzee | From a story telling perspective the 3 laws work okay in every day life. But its very easy to poke holes in the laws and have different interpretations of the laws just like humans could. Even with the government enforcing the rules, its very easy to blind the senses of a robot and tell it to pull a trigger. After all it has to follow the command, and it can't tell if its violating the first law. | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 22:07 | comment | added | David Thornley | In "The Naked Sun", IIRC, one character said it would take a long time to develop a positronic brain that didn't have the Three Laws baked in. I'd assume that the first designs had the Three Laws, and everybody more or less copied the designs from then on. | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 21:50 | answer | added | LSerni | timeline score: 1 | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 21:48 | comment | added | Cort Ammon | Asimov also never explained the implementation of the three laws. It was unclear whether that was a design choice or a fundamental nature of the positronic mind. | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 21:42 | comment | added | elemtilas | Hi bramble, and welcome! Please take a moment to review the help center and tour --- those resources have lots of good guidance as to how to ask & answer queries here at Worldbuilding. Right now, your query is scheduled for closure due it being too broad. This is your opportunity to edit it in such a way that you focus on one aspect of the problem you're facing in your worldbuilding. You can ask more than question (in separate posts!) but SE works on the one question one answer model. | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 21:38 | answer | added | Den Warren | timeline score: 1 | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 21:33 | comment | added | Ghedipunk | We already have large machines capable of harming and killing humans. Governments regulate their manufacture by requiring seat belts and air bags, and regulate their use with traffic laws and licensing. -- As far as absolute measures... well... mostly effective measures with automobile safety are better than no measures at all. | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 21:22 | answer | added | Alexander | timeline score: 2 | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 21:17 | answer | added | John O | timeline score: 0 | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 21:15 | review | Close votes | |||
| Oct 12, 2018 at 1:03 | |||||
| Oct 11, 2018 at 21:01 | answer | added | The Square-Cube Law | timeline score: 3 | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 20:58 | comment | added | Mołot | "What efforts could a government make to achieve such a task and absolutely make sure these private companies don't develop killer robots behind closed doors?" - there were at least few entire books about just that, and Asimov wrote about fails of this system even when it was enforced... | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 20:49 | comment | added | Separatrix | You realise that most of Asimov's 3 laws stories were about how the 3 laws weren't sufficient to protect either robots or humans | |
| Oct 11, 2018 at 20:45 | review | First posts | |||
| Oct 11, 2018 at 20:58 | |||||
| Oct 11, 2018 at 20:42 | history | asked | bramble | CC BY-SA 4.0 |