The Three Laws

Science fiction writer Isaac Asimov originally created the "Three Laws of Responsible Robotics" and forever changed the way we all looked at robots. I can remember, as a boy, reading each story and waiting anxiously for the next. All of the stories were woven around the three laws in exceptional circumstance. The Three Laws:

• A robot may not injure a human being, or through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
• A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
• A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Now that thinking robots are getting closer, CS folks are trying to update these laws to:

• A human may not deploy a robot without the human-robot work system meeting the highest legal and professional standards of safety and ethics.
• A robot must respond to humans as appropriate for their roles.
• A robot must be endowed with sufficient situated autonomy to protect its own existence as long as such protection provides smooth transfer of control which does not conflict with the First and Second Laws.

I have a problem with this...

To begin with the new set would allow robots to be built to kill human beings. The original laws seemed to have as the main thrust the protection of humans from what are obviously going to be superior beings.

The new laws read as if written by lawyers. Lawyers, and the use of the law for the protection of humans, do not have much of a track record in the 21st century so far. I prefer Mr Asimov's original, simple, straight forward, long tested (albeit in fiction) and easy to understand laws.

The CS folks say: "In reality, engineers are still struggling to give robots basic vision and language skills. These efforts are hindered in part by our lack of understanding of how these skills are managed in the human brain. We are far from a time when humans may teach robots a moral code and responsibility."

This sounds like folks who really haven't taken the singularity into account.

Look. Things are very confused right now in the understanding of the workings of the human brain. That will not last. Knowledge in all areas is increasing exponentially, including those areas needed to perfect our understanding of biological systems and networks. We could be neck deep in intelligent robots before we know what happened. To use the convenient notion that "We are far from a time when humans may teach robots a moral code and responsibility" is not going to get us what we need in time.