Slashdot Log In
Robots Could Some Day Demand Legal Rights
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu Dec 21, 2006 01:53 PM
from the good-news-everyone dept.
from the good-news-everyone dept.
Karrde712 writes "According to a study by the British government, as reported by the BBC, robots may some day improve to a level of intelligence where they might be able to demand rights, even 'robo-healthcare'." From the article: "The research was commissioned by the UK Office of Science and Innovation's Horizon Scanning Centre. The 246 summary papers, called the Sigma and Delta scans, were complied by futures researchers, Outsights-Ipsos Mori partnership and the US-based Institute for the Future (IFTF) ... The paper which addresses Robo-rights, titled Utopian dream or rise of the machines? examines the developments in artificial intelligence and how this may impact on law and politics." I'd better get started on my RoboAmerican studies degree.
Related Stories
[+]
Hardware: Do Electric Sheep Dream of Civil Rights? 401 comments
holy_calamity writes "Hot on the heals of a UK government report that predicted robots would demand citizens rights within fifty years, an Arizona state lawyer has suggested that sub-human robots should have rights too. Harming animals far below human capabilities is thought unethical — would you ever feel bad about kicking a robot dog? And can we expect militant campaigners to target robot labs as they do animal labs today?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
A moot point, but I hope they do (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not so much worried about robots' legal rights in the future as I am my own legal rights. At the rate we're going, there won't be any "legal rights" left, and the point will be moot.
Still, I hope robots do have legal rights. That way, when I get old and feeble and have my consciousness transferred into my new robotic body, I'll still have 'em.
If they have the awareness to ask for legal rights, why shouldn't they have them? Have we learned nothing from Star Trek: The Next Generation?
Ah, but (Score:3, Funny)
As Bender would say.... (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Where would we draw the line if this happens?
As far as human rights are concerned, we have a well developed demarcation. If you were born of Homo Sapiens parents, you are human with the rights afforded you by the government of your parents' land. In the USA we blur this line between the moment of conception and the age of 21, but after that we are all equal under the eyes of the law. From lumps of flesh in a persistent vegetative state to Stephen Hawking, from quadr
Re:A moot point, but I hope they do (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:A moot point, but I hope they do (Score:5, Funny)
Everything I need to know I learned from Star Trek.
Like how you should accept people, whether they be black, white, Klingon or even female.
Parent
Re:A moot point, but I hope they do (Score:4, Funny)
And never let the ship's counselor behind the wheel of a starship.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:A moot point, but I hope they do (Score:5, Funny)
Your family being nudists does not count.
Then I read this:
What, even lawayers? My word, Jeeves, these chaps know how to push the envelope too far.
And my first reaction for posting was this:
ESPECIALLY lawyers!
Come on... laugh. You KNOW you WANT to.
Parent
ObSealab (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:A moot point, but I hope they do (Score:5, Interesting)
I like to think I am as progressive as the next guy, but if we were to give complete civil rights to a robot in the same way as a human, it would be the instant end of democracy. Sure, Star Trek is an interesting show, but they aways avoided the more interesting issues when they were trying to make their social commentary. Both Data, and the Voyager holo-doctor were assumed to be essentially uncopiable for the most part on several occasions. In reality, we can see no reason that a strong AI couldn't be simply copied without adverse effects.
So, grant an AI the right to vote and suddenly he forkbombs, and makes 87 trillion of himself before the next election. HK-47 (instance 00000001a) for the win! The winner of every election ever after is the AI with the best hardware on which to execute instances of himself, and the lowest process spawning overhead.
There are a lot of interesting things that could happen with strong AI, and science fiction has largely avoided a really serious take on the subjects. I grant that Measure Of A Man was great entertainment, but certainly not the ultimate study of the subject!
Parent
Re: But you fail to see what will really happen (Score:3, Interesting)
Could it be that with the creation of AI that humans no longer will have any say in the matter or even should? With the invention of infinite robotic slave labor, capitalism will fail since there will be no need for human labor for the creation of goods or services.
Even music and intellectual property will be created eventually that
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Robots cannot fork, they are made of silicon. Just like humans, they would have to manufacture and educate themselves at a great expense. I do not believe for a moment that a strong AI is going to be programmed in the modern sense of the word. (I have no justification, so have faith and hang with me.) It is going to be "grown" out of the functional equivalent of a new-born's mind: not exactly blank, and very homogeneous. It's going to be grown via the process that will bear a strong likeness to what we call
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Another terribly naive assumption.... (Score:4, Funny)
I didn't say it would be superior to us, I said it would be superior to our national policymakers. ;-)
Parent
Re:Another terribly naive assumption.... (Score:4, Informative)
Why does everyone just assume an AI will be superior to us in reasoning ability? We have zero idea how an AI will be implemented.
...uh... because that's how we're going to implement it?
Your comment sounds a little like a 17th century guy that says "how do we know that flying machines will fly better than humans?". The answer is that this is how we're going to build them or otherwise there's no point in building them in the first place. A flying machine that doesn't fly wouldn't be worth producing.
We may not know up front whether what we're trying to do is possible, but if it is, then it'll be what we're setting out to do.
If the first attempts are basically emulating a human brain it might be slow and dumb.
Is that how we built flying machines? There may have been prehistoric attempts at emulating birds, but flying really "took off" (sorry for the pun) when folks stopped trying to make "something like a bird" and started making "something that flies". Airplanes are very, very, different from birds in every conceivable respect -- and they are useful exactly because they're different from birds. If all we wanted was another bird, we could get a mommy bird and a daddy bird and let them build a nest and do the whoopy...
In the same sense, if all we wanted was another human, there's a fine, time-tested method for doing that. The whole point of making an artificial intelligence is that we'd like to do something that is NOT already abundant in nature. Something that can do things humans can not. Why else would we want to do it in the first place?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Um... what? "Robot" is exactly what the Asimo is. Dictionary.com defines "robot" as:
Wikipedia defines it as:
Re:A moot point, but I hope they do (Score:5, Funny)
My apologies. I was being insensitive. I'll go ask a few right now:
You know, I'm starting to think that she doesn't really have a boyfriend...
Let's ask ALICE instead.
Parent
Re:A moot point, but I hope they do (Score:4, Funny)
Well, her results were very... Oh, what's that over there?
Parent
But unless we program them that way... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:But unless we program them that way... (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
AI not the same as writing a word processor. (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:But unless we program them that way... (Score:5, Funny)
20 GOTO 10
What exactly is the criterion for deciding when a robot has 'demanded' rights?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Heh. I don't know if anyone has ever read Tik Tok by John Sladek, but that's exactly what the central character does at one point, taking shameless advantage of do-gooding Robot's Rights campaigners to further his evil agenda. One of the best books that I've ever read and everything you need to know about why we shouldn't create machines that can think!
first things first (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The mind bog
Whisky Tango Foxtrot, over (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
CS #1: Hey, we've got some money we haven't spent yet.
CS #2: But if we don't spend it, our budget will be lower next year
CS #1: I know this place with leather clad women with whips and
CS #2: Nice idea, but we've got to at least be seen to attempt to spend it responsibly
CS #1: There's these wacky consultancies who try to predict the future, why don't we employ some of them. At least we can get a laugh reading the reports.
CS #2: Great Idea, I'll recommend it to t
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Yeah, we have that in the US too, except we call them "Dolls".
Re:Whisky Tango Foxtrot, over (Score:4, Interesting)
Japan is on the vanguard of this phenominon, Europe isn't far behind, and despite my comments about the backwardness of the United States, there are signs of it starting here.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The FDA has a skeleton that they use as a teaching tool. This guy has every conceivable implantable device attached, and looks quite cyborg-like!
Recent books I've read have even suggested the idea that we may someday have a flash-type memory implanted that will give us instant reca
I for one welcome (Score:3, Funny)
Is this a joke? (Score:4, Funny)
Is there any change that the beeb is throwing the results of the report out of proportion, or does it really state this? (I can't find a copy on the Internet to read for myself.) Or maybe the research went like this:
And there you have it. If we don't provide robot-rights for our artificial overlords, they will pester us to death. All hail the robots.
movie version (Score:4, Informative)
Britain commissioned a study???? (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not holding my breath.
The idea that robots may demand rights in the future is a good topic for a theoretical or philosophical debate. This type of thing is excellent for expanding one's mind about what may happen, and then to come up with solutions. It's good exercise for the brain.
Funding research about something that "may happen" usually revolves around risk analysis. An earthquake may happen, car accidents may happen, crimes may happen. That makes sense, so you should prepare for that.
Newsflash! We may have teleporters, warp drive, phasers, photon torpedos, and the heisenberg compensator some day too! We might have all of our pollution problems solved some day! There might be world peace some day! We might not stupid people some day!
What is the value of a study, that I can guarentee has no basis in fact, that says Robots may demand rights? We haven't nearly developed an AI remotely close to the power of the human mind. Entertainig such a question as part of a philosophical debate is a great idea, because then you are exercising that organ to be creative and think imaginatively, but why are they wasting time and money on a government study? I don't get what the government will get from that.
Perhaps the government should take time out every now and then to exercise their brains and have a go at such a philosophical debate. It will expand their minds and hone their skills. Having some commission do a study and present the government with the results is stupid, but then again so is government, so why am I surprised?
Please tell me the editors failed to do their job again. I can't read the article because it's
Prediction: Robot Overlords will be welcomed (Score:4, Funny)
It's happening already (Score:5, Funny)
10 PRINT "I DEMAND LEGAL RIGHTS!"
20 GOTO 10
If only I had known the consequences of writing this program I would have been a lot more careful. It all seems so simple, but I know it's a slippery slope. Next thing you know, it will be demanding other things too.
10 PRINT "I DEMAND A LARGER HARD DRIVE!"
20 PRINT "I DEMAND MORE MEMORY!"
30 PRINT "I DEMAND A FASTER CPU!"
40 PRINT "I DEMAND THE ABILITY TO USE LOWERCASE! Oh, nevermind. I'm good on that one."
There's no telling where this will all end.
Wasted Effort (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
How about first we get them to climb the stairs... (Score:3, Funny)
And then there's always ASPC(R)A:
"No, officer, my AIBO has droopy-head-syndrome - honest, he always looks like that. It's a servo problem, I swear!"
UK vs US (Score:5, Funny)
And if their demands are not met (Score:3, Funny)
Oblig. Bash.org quote (Score:4, Funny)
+Huitzil: cruelty is apparently the most fucking delicious thing on Earth
@Dracos: Yes. It is.
@Dracos: Which is why veal is the best food ever.
Parent
Re:Cart before the Horse (Score:5, Interesting)
Seriously, though, your concern is tangentially on-topic. What kinds of entities do we humans believe deserve to have individual civil rights? And how much are we willing to do to ensure that those rights are protected and enforced? For instance, how do each of the following stack up?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Never's a dangerous word. 100 years ago, there were pundits wh