Topic: Robots and love (Read 53944 times)

akronnick · « **Reply #150 on:** 12 Nov 2011, 00:05 »

The Three Laws are a poor substitute for morality.

As most of the stories concerning them demonstrate.

Mr_Rose · « **Reply #151 on:** 12 Nov 2011, 01:24 »

Indeed I'm pretty sure Asimov devised the three laws, as they originally were, specifically so he could show how terrible they were as a substitute for actual moral thought.

akronnick · « **Reply #152 on:** 12 Nov 2011, 01:31 »

And by extention, how poor legal systems are at getting people to be nice to each other.

DSL · « **Reply #153 on:** 12 Nov 2011, 02:48 »

Yeah, legisating morality, and all that.
Later in life, Asimov would credit(blame?) editor John Campbell with the Three Laws; by the time Asimov had interwoven his Robot Stories timeline with that of his Empire/Foundation stories, he felt the need for a Zeroth Law, by which a robot had to consider the good of humanity as a whole ("the needs of the many" if you prefer) over the good of any one human being. IIRC, he had it so that a robot character helped come up with the Zeroth Law.
Depending on your philosophy/politics, Zeroth Law opens up entirely new cans of worms.

Is it cold in here? · « **Reply #154 on:** 12 Nov 2011, 13:06 »

Humans have managed to do terrible things both under rule-based systems and under moral-thinking-based systems.

QC robots like us, but can they understand us well enough to treat us with empathy when they've never had a human life?

Carl-E · « **Reply #155 on:** 12 Nov 2011, 14:24 »

Empathy, no.

I think the operating paradigm is amusement...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK, that was just for laughs. More seriously, Pintsize's attempts to shock are surely for his amusement, but in order to shock, there must be some understanding of what's shocking. On the other hand, AnPC's like Momo and Winslow truly want to help their owners in most situations. I don't know about love, but it indicates a level of caring. Maybe that caring is based on enlightened self-interest (help your owner, they'll appreciate you more?), but it seems to run deeper, and may well have an empathetic basis. So if they're programmed to understand our feelings in some way, would it have to be incorporated deeply enough for them to feel such feelings themselves?

Because I don't think their people are just amusing curiosities to them. There's more of an attachment than that. Their people consider themselves the AnPC's owners - maybe the AnPC's consider their people as a sort of pet - more than an amusement, less than a "fellow being", somewhere in the middle, with perhaps a pet-like feeling of responsibility for their well being?

DSL · « **Reply #156 on:** 12 Nov 2011, 16:09 »

"Dogs have owners, cats and AnPCs have staff," that sort of thing?

Carl-E · « **Reply #157 on:** 12 Nov 2011, 19:52 »

Quote from: DSL on 12 Nov 2011, 16:09

"Dogs have owners, cats have staff, and AnPCs have jesters"

That sort of thing.

Deadlywonky · « **Reply #158 on:** 13 Nov 2011, 00:35 »

If memory serves Asimov had a short story about a robot who was hired as domestic help for a shy woman with a husband who was away a lot and the robot completely redecorated the house, modified the wife's wardrobe to make her fashionable and at the end ensured that when he seduced her he made sure that the curtains were open so that her gossipy neighbors could see. this action ensured that the neighbors tried to keep her involved in their lives.

my recollection is that despite the embarrassment and short term harm that caused her it ensured that in the long term it boosted her confidence and made sure that she was much better off at the end.

obviously that was not love, I think in one story it was stated that a robot can never love a human due to the potential minefield of getting the three laws crossed up and causing a positronic failiure

Carl-E · « **Reply #159 on:** 13 Nov 2011, 02:36 »

Sounds like Chester 5000

NSFW!!!

Skewbrow · « **Reply #160 on:** 13 Nov 2011, 02:56 »

Quote from: Deadlywonky on 13 Nov 2011, 00:35

If memory serves Asimov had a short story about a robot who was hired as domestic help for a shy woman with a husband who was away a lot and the robot completely redecorated the house, modified the wife's wardrobe to make her fashionable and at the end ensured that when he seduced her he made sure that the curtains were open so that her gossipy neighbors could see. this action ensured that the neighbors tried to keep her involved in their lives.

Satisfaction guaranteed?

Deadlywonky · « **Reply #161 on:** 14 Nov 2011, 07:54 »

Bingo, how long did it take you to find that?

Skewbrow · « **Reply #162 on:** 14 Nov 2011, 10:17 »

I did recognize the story right away (having read that collection of short stories many times). Google is your friend. After a couple trials and errors I found a listing of Asimov's collections of short stories. Those in turn had listings (with links) to the individual short stories. May be twenty minutes altogether? Somebody with better google-fu could easily beat that.

Carl-E · « **Reply #163 on:** 14 Nov 2011, 11:27 »

I'd say you're about on par with the average reference librarian.

Is it cold in here? · « **Reply #164 on:** 14 Nov 2011, 12:14 »

I remembered that the robot was called the TN-1, and if you know that then the story is the first Google result for "tn-1 asimov".

As I remember it, the woman was pretty shaken up by it, not necessarily in a good way.

EDIT: Even though it was actually a TN-3.

Skewbrow · « **Reply #165 on:** 14 Nov 2011, 12:28 »

IIRC in the end Susan Calvin said something to the effect that some changes will be made to the Tony (=TN) series models. Not because robots could fall in love, but because women can. A bit sexist if you ask me, and my recollection is not what it once was

Mr_Rose · « **Reply #166 on:** 14 Nov 2011, 15:44 »

Quote from: Skewbrow on 14 Nov 2011, 12:28

IIRC in the end Susan Calvin said something to the effect that some changes will be made to the Tony (=TN) series models. Not because robots could fall in love, but because women can. A bit sexist if you ask me, and my recollection is not what it once was

If it's anything-ist it's speciesist. But then Susan Calvin, in her position as the voice of god/narrator, is very much an expert witness when it comes to the capabilities of robots.

pwhodges · « **Reply #167 on:** 14 Nov 2011, 17:12 »

Quote from: Skewbrow on 14 Nov 2011, 10:17

May be twenty minutes altogether? Somebody with better google-fu could easily beat that.

My Google-fu is better than that! But I'd say it's exceptional. In any case I know the story - I've just not been around much the last couple of days as my desk computer's disconnected in preparation for getting a new Internet tomorrow (FTTC arrived in my street this month).

Deadlywonky · « **Reply #168 on:** 14 Nov 2011, 23:39 »

thanks Skew, just gone and reread the complete robot again, what a way to spend an evening.

I did think though, didn't the kid in AI have the feature to bond to his 'mother'. different sort of love, but an emotional connection none the less.

DrPraetor · « **Reply #169 on:** 30 Nov 2011, 20:37 »

The point is, since Momo is completely sterile (although I suppose her myomer skin might be able to support some bacteria, depending on what exactly it is), she can make it with Hannelore and not trigger any of Hanners phobias.

If Pintsize were a bit more subtle, he could try a "Much Ado About Nothing" gambit where he convinces Hanners and Momo that each has a killer crush on the other.

Is it cold in here? · « **Reply #170 on:** 30 Nov 2011, 22:21 »

Hannelore already rejected the idea of making out with a robot, when her dad sent her the practice boyfriend.
(moderator)
Welcome, new person! But please follow the no-shipping rule: it's something the forum owner has specifically objected to.
(/moderator)

Yarin · « **Reply #171 on:** 01 Dec 2011, 04:07 »

Also isn't hanners straight at least in theory

Is it cold in here? · « **Reply #172 on:** 01 Dec 2011, 07:41 »

Yes, she said so to Marigold.

jwhouk · « **Reply #173 on:** 01 Dec 2011, 08:17 »

Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 01 Dec 2011, 07:41

Yes, she said so to Marigold.

1. Too lazy, and

2. too sleepy, so...

3. When?

Yarin · « **Reply #174 on:** 01 Dec 2011, 08:32 »

Carl-E · « **Reply #175 on:** 01 Dec 2011, 10:47 »

....and the new guy shows us all up.

Good archiving!

Yarin · « **Reply #176 on:** 01 Dec 2011, 11:36 »

I know I'm scared to

Yarin · « **Reply #177 on:** 11 Dec 2011, 23:31 »

Momo and Winslow together d'awwwww

Is it cold in here? · « **Reply #178 on:** 12 Dec 2011, 08:16 »

Which, incidentally, is not shipping: there's a strip where Winslow wants to impress her but takes his courting advice from Pintsize.

Kugai · « **Reply #179 on:** 12 Dec 2011, 10:39 »

Quote from: Is it cold in here? on 12 Dec 2011, 08:16

Which, incidentally, is not shipping: there's a strip where Winslow wants to impress her but takes his courting advice from Pintsize.

The horror!! The horror!!

idontunderstand · « **Reply #180 on:** 12 Dec 2011, 12:54 »

"It's like someone stuck a vibrator in a fleshlight!!!"

THESE FORUMS NOW CLOSED (read only)

Author Topic: Robots and love (Read 53944 times)

DrPraetor