Total Posts:41|Showing Posts:31-41|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Laws of Robotics

drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2013 6:07:29 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 2/11/2013 11:26:18 AM, Sidewalker wrote:

I don't see why you would do that. The laws of robotics don't apply to humans, they apply to robots, so you're still only talking about robots here.

Well, not only talking about robots, taling about robots that are conscious beings with free will...so I suppose restating it "For conscious robots with free will..."

It's definately a change in what the term robots means, so the qualifiers "conscious" and "free will" need to be there to avoid confusion.

You're the only one confused. No one else seems to be having a problem here.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2013 6:16:27 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 2/11/2013 3:53:29 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I Robot is such a good book. And nothing like the movie.

Because it started out as an original work that Disney decided to toss Asimov elements into to make it marketable.
http://www.screenwritersutopia.com...

I've always thought that the "I, Robot" stories would make a good TV series, like a Law & Order thing with robots (with Powell and Donovan as the main characters)
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,041
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2013 4:52:25 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 2/12/2013 6:16:27 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 2/11/2013 3:53:29 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I Robot is such a good book. And nothing like the movie.

Because it started out as an original work that Disney decided to toss Asimov elements into to make it marketable.
http://www.screenwritersutopia.com...

I've always thought that the "I, Robot" stories would make a good TV series, like a Law & Order thing with robots (with Powell and Donovan as the main characters)

With each mini-story as like an episode or couple episodes?

That'd be kind of neat. Asimov was a great author.
No one normal accomplished anything meaningful in this world.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2013 6:00:41 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 2/12/2013 4:52:25 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 2/12/2013 6:16:27 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 2/11/2013 3:53:29 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I Robot is such a good book. And nothing like the movie.

Because it started out as an original work that Disney decided to toss Asimov elements into to make it marketable.
http://www.screenwritersutopia.com...

I've always thought that the "I, Robot" stories would make a good TV series, like a Law & Order thing with robots (with Powell and Donovan as the main characters)

With each mini-story as like an episode or couple episodes?

That'd be kind of neat. Asimov was a great author.

Yes. Obviously there'd have to be a lot of original material in order to last more than 1-2 seasons. It might be better as a miniseries, but there really isn't any overarching plot among the short stories, unless you basically make "Evitable Conflict" or "Evidence!" as the finale with things building up to that.
Buddamoose
Posts: 19,562
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2013 6:44:39 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
This really to me brings the difference, if you will, between "robotics" and actual people into light. That difference being the concept of "emotion" or "empathy" and "sympathy."

What I truly think, is even despite these "loopholes" if you will, these machines are still following their base programming to the best of their abilities. It may not always seem like it, but in the end that is what they're doing.

Machines and Robots are incapable of feeling emotion, and as much as we could try to emulate it, it would not be the same, because emotion isnt based upon concrete law, its not based upon concrete and definable "programming." It is based upon ever changing, and fluid circumstances, that would require coding and programming to emulate that would become, not positing that god exists of course in this circumstance, "god-like" in its fluidity and capability.

I've always been a strong proponent that articial intelligence should be controlled and, cut off, if you will at a certain point, lest these typed of loopholes in logic be encountered, that would lead to disastrous consequences for the creators(humanity) of these robots.
"Reality is an illusion created due to a lack of alcohol"
-Airmax1227

"You were the moon all this time, and he was always there to make you shine."

"Was he the sun?"

"No honey, he was the darkness"

-Kazekirion
Sidewalker
Posts: 3,730
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2013 10:24:00 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 2/12/2013 6:44:39 PM, Buddamoose wrote:
This really to me brings the difference, if you will, between "robotics" and actual people into light. That difference being the concept of "emotion" or "empathy" and "sympathy."

What I truly think, is even despite these "loopholes" if you will, these machines are still following their base programming to the best of their abilities. It may not always seem like it, but in the end that is what they're doing.

Machines and Robots are incapable of feeling emotion, and as much as we could try to emulate it, it would not be the same, because emotion isnt based upon concrete law, its not based upon concrete and definable "programming." It is based upon ever changing, and fluid circumstances, that would require coding and programming to emulate that would become, not positing that god exists of course in this circumstance, "god-like" in its fluidity and capability.

I've always been a strong proponent that articial intelligence should be controlled and, cut off, if you will at a certain point, lest these typed of loopholes in logic be encountered, that would lead to disastrous consequences for the creators(humanity) of these robots.

That would be real robots, apparently this thread is about conscious robots with free will, emotions, and that kind of thing.
It is one of the commonest of mistakes to consider that the limit of our power of perception is also the limit of all there is to perceive." " C. W. Leadbeater
bladerunner060
Posts: 7,126
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/12/2013 10:26:13 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 2/12/2013 6:00:41 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 2/12/2013 4:52:25 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 2/12/2013 6:16:27 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 2/11/2013 3:53:29 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I Robot is such a good book. And nothing like the movie.

Because it started out as an original work that Disney decided to toss Asimov elements into to make it marketable.
http://www.screenwritersutopia.com...

I've always thought that the "I, Robot" stories would make a good TV series, like a Law & Order thing with robots (with Powell and Donovan as the main characters)

With each mini-story as like an episode or couple episodes?

That'd be kind of neat. Asimov was a great author.

Yes. Obviously there'd have to be a lot of original material in order to last more than 1-2 seasons. It might be better as a miniseries, but there really isn't any overarching plot among the short stories, unless you basically make "Evitable Conflict" or "Evidence!" as the finale with things building up to that.

Would that make Susan Calvin the equivalent of Doctor Huang?
Assistant moderator to airmax1227. PM me with any questions or concerns!
tvellalott
Posts: 10,906
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2013 7:12:33 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Can someone list the relevant books to these laws?
I've always wanted to read some Asimov and would like someone who has read them to give me a few books in recommended reading order.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2013 7:22:55 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 2/17/2013 7:12:33 AM, tvellalott wrote:
Can someone list the relevant books to these laws?
I've always wanted to read some Asimov and would like someone who has read them to give me a few books in recommended reading order.

http://en.wikipedia.org...(Asimov)

Now, mostly it is a collection of short stories, and there is a lot of overlap with the anthologies.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2013 7:23:50 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 2/12/2013 10:26:13 PM, bladerunner060 wrote:
At 2/12/2013 6:00:41 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 2/12/2013 4:52:25 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 2/12/2013 6:16:27 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 2/11/2013 3:53:29 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
I Robot is such a good book. And nothing like the movie.

Because it started out as an original work that Disney decided to toss Asimov elements into to make it marketable.
http://www.screenwritersutopia.com...

I've always thought that the "I, Robot" stories would make a good TV series, like a Law & Order thing with robots (with Powell and Donovan as the main characters)

With each mini-story as like an episode or couple episodes?

That'd be kind of neat. Asimov was a great author.

Yes. Obviously there'd have to be a lot of original material in order to last more than 1-2 seasons. It might be better as a miniseries, but there really isn't any overarching plot among the short stories, unless you basically make "Evitable Conflict" or "Evidence!" as the finale with things building up to that.

Would that make Susan Calvin the equivalent of Doctor Huang?

Something like that.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/17/2013 2:26:38 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 2/12/2013 10:24:00 PM, Sidewalker wrote:
At 2/12/2013 6:44:39 PM, Buddamoose wrote:
This really to me brings the difference, if you will, between "robotics" and actual people into light. That difference being the concept of "emotion" or "empathy" and "sympathy."

What I truly think, is even despite these "loopholes" if you will, these machines are still following their base programming to the best of their abilities. It may not always seem like it, but in the end that is what they're doing.

Machines and Robots are incapable of feeling emotion, and as much as we could try to emulate it, it would not be the same, because emotion isnt based upon concrete law, its not based upon concrete and definable "programming." It is based upon ever changing, and fluid circumstances, that would require coding and programming to emulate that would become, not positing that god exists of course in this circumstance, "god-like" in its fluidity and capability.

I've always been a strong proponent that articial intelligence should be controlled and, cut off, if you will at a certain point, lest these typed of loopholes in logic be encountered, that would lead to disastrous consequences for the creators(humanity) of these robots.

That would be real robots, apparently this thread is about conscious robots with free will, emotions, and that kind of thing.

Was that not evident by the reference to the three laws? What real robots using the three laws did you imagine we could be talking about?

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.