Comic Discussion > QUESTIONABLE CONTENT
Robots and love
Yarin:
I'm just saying everyone is entitled to their opinion (unless it conflicts with mine) no just kidding :lol:
dps:
--- Quote from: DSL on 10 Nov 2011, 17:00 ---Don't be condescending. Most of the forum is well up on its Asimov and Co., or a least familiar with SF.
Though Asimov did relate one story about a reporter, following up on a story about a factory worker who had been crushed by an industrial robot arm (he had been inside the safety cage when he shouldn't have been) who called him to ask why the Three Laws didn't prevent that.
--- End quote ---
I wasn't intending to be condensending. I was asking why the person who posted the comment I was responding to held the opinion that they posted. One obvious answer would be that the poster felt that the Three Laws are real, not fictional, though I didn't think it was the case.
Is it cold in here?:
One of Asimov's characters pointed out that a sophisticated robot following the Three Laws could be hard to distinguish from a virtuous human.
Skewbrow:
--- Quote from: dps on 10 Nov 2011, 16:41 ---
--- Quote from: Skewbrow on 01 Sep 2011, 13:41 ---But the AI in our friendly robots must have some kind of a moral code. Otherwise they would surely be used for criminal ends? If not Asimov's three laws, then something else?
--- End quote ---
Why would this be true in fiction (other than that by Asimov himself) when it's not true in real life? You do understand that Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics are fictional and have nothing to do with how real robots are designed and built, don't you? I hope so.
And in the QC world, is there any doubt that Pintsize would engage in all sorts of criminal behavior if Marty would let him (and probably does so behind Marten's back anyway)?
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: dps on 11 Nov 2011, 19:32 ---
--- Quote from: DSL on 10 Nov 2011, 17:00 ---Don't be condescending. Most of the forum is well up on its Asimov and Co., or a least familiar with SF.
Though Asimov did relate one story about a reporter, following up on a story about a factory worker who had been crushed by an industrial robot arm (he had been inside the safety cage when he shouldn't have been) who called him to ask why the Three Laws didn't prevent that.
--- End quote ---
I wasn't intending to be condensending. I was asking why the person who posted the comment I was responding to held the opinion that they posted. One obvious answer would be that the poster felt that the Three Laws are real, not fictional, though I didn't think it was the case.
--- End quote ---
Pray, tell me, how does the statement "the anthroPCs must have some kind of a moral code" imply that "I feel that the three laws are real"? Asimov's three laws were just mentioned in a couple earlier posts, so they served as a point of reference at that time.
Is it cold in here?:
Today's robots are not good examples of what's needed. There's little moral content in welding a car.
Build a robot with free will, and if you don't have the Three Laws you'll need to put in something better or come up with a damned good reason.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version