in the shell

This article in USA Today made me wonder ... are the people in this forum as in favor of robots as I would think they are?

Japanese robots enter daily life--USA Today, 1 March 2008

Although I can see why people would worry about job security, etc., I love the idea of robots and AI and all that. Not unconditionally, but I'm definitely pro-robot.

But what does everyone else think?

--Jeff

(And the quote in the topic title is one of Roy Batty's from Blade Runner)

I read that article too (thanks to digg) and it seems to me that it is based a lot on the documentary called 'Mechanical Love' (which I already mentioned in this thread: http://www.neomythos.com/gitsphpBB/viewtopic.php?t=1890).

Anyway, I find it quite interesting and I think that no matter what, robots will be around us pretty much everywhere and for anything, like computers today.

Although very open minded, I'd struggle to accept robots as equal members of society unless they showed a truly sentient intelligence. That's not to say I'd discriminate them or deprive them of rights, but they'd be more along the lines of basic rights similar (bout different to) the level at which animal rights are expressed. Were they to become an equal sentient race alongside humans I would have no choice but to accept them as an equal race.

As for the concept of loving a robot, there are many forms of 'love', at least IMHO. I love my car, but not like 'that', I love it because it's great fun to drive, never lets me down and I'm quite attached to it as an object. I love my cats, but also not in the truest sense, they are living beings and they show affection to me so it's only natural that I do the same back, and have an emotional bond with them. As far as robots go, using a 'gynoid' as a lover without a sentient sole would be tantamount to merely an advanced form of masturbation. You can only consummate your love to something else that can truly feel your love, surely?

As far as robots go, using a 'gynoid' as a lover without a sentient sole would be tantamount to merely an advanced form of masturbation. You can only consummate your love to something else that can truly feel your love, surely?

i think Innocence touches on this when Locus Solus tried to dub ghosts into the Hadalys. I'm also reminded of one of the Robot Carnival vignettes where the guy makes the lifelike doll and freaks out when she not only responds to love, but asks for love in return. This is the theme in Astro Boy as well...A.I....we make something to fulfill a human need in such a manner that a creation could be advanced enough to love as an individual, but what do we do when that creation asks for love in return???

it's the grand pinocchio dilemma...where the puppet suffers for wanting to be counted as human.

i'm all for robots...strictly because they are cool, but i think to make them into mock-ups of humans only underscores our lonliness. that's too much to put on a robot....

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 591734.ece

Suicide robot: I guess it didn't have access to the Three Laws....

I just swore at my PC out loud because of the people in the comments saying he's going to suffer in hell for eternity, some people just make me so unbelievably pissed off..

Has to be one of the more elaborate suicides I've ever heard about though.

"Love the idea of robots all around me!"
"They're great for most things, but maybe not everywhere."

I like to separate my fantasy and pragmatism . . . so on two levels I agree with the both of these!

Saito: I don't think we necessarily have to have sentient robots all around us, "robot" just refers to an autonomous or at least distinguishable machine unit. Robots all around us would be the immanence of computerized technology in many more aspects of our lives than they are already.

My intimation, and that of SAC, is that sentience might not be an option. There are AI theorists who believe that sentience and self-awareness will spontaneously occur when a complex-enough AI is created. After all, if you believe modern science (if you don't then that's fine) life on earth wasn't planned either, it 'just happened' when the conditions turned out right at various stages.

GiTS explores this via the Tachikoma in SAC, who were constructed with a complex AI designed to be able to react to complex combat scenarios. Due to a set of circumstances (which still aren't clear), and the complexity of their 'brain' they became self aware and started displaying child-like sentience.

Mankind has discovered many things by accident, and I feel it may eventually discover how to create sentient AI by accident too, probably whilst trying to avoid making sentient AI. The danger is that, once self-aware, they may choose to ignore the 3 laws, at which point life gets interesting.

I remember reading that sentient AI might be better based on principles of quantum mechanics rather than classical physics--or at least that the human brain might be better understood that way (I may have made the leap to AI myself--it's been over a year since I read about this). I believe more about this is in Why Beauty Is Truth: A History of Symmetry by Ian Stewart, but I'll check to make sure. [edit: not true! but still a good book. Still ... Google "quantum brain" for lots of info]

Would hardwiring the Three Laws into robots be ethical? I mean, it certainly benefits us, and may be a prerequisite for society's acceptance of sentient or sentient-like robots--but are we creating slaves?

--Jeff

Jeff, have you watched the 'Second Renaissance' Animatrix shorts? They explore at large the ethics of what happens when AI reaches a level where it becomes self aware and demands rights. They are kind of a black tale on the subject, but still...

Actually, I'm completely wrong about that book--but search for "quantum brain" and you'll find references all over the internet.

I've seen the "Second Renaissance" shorts but I can't remember them very well--it's been years. I'll have a look when I get the chance.

Cheers,
Jeff

Wow... part of that sounded eerily like a Healthcare Monitoring Network/Noble Rot kind of system... sound familiar to anyone?