Bill Christensen
Technovelgy.com
LiveScience.com bill Christensen
technovelgy.com
livescience.com – Sat Sep 19, 9:56 am ET
Robots and computers are often designed to act autonomously, that is, without human intervention. Is it possible for an autonomous machine to make moral judgments that are in line with human judgment?
This question has given rise to the issue of machine ethics and morality. As a practical matter, can a robot or computer be programmed to act in an ethical manner? Can a machine be designed to act morally?
Isaac Asimov's famous fundamental Rules of Robotics are intended to impose ethical conduct on autonomous machines.Issues about ethical behavior are found in films like the 1982 movie Blade Runner. When the replicant Roy Batty is given the choice to let his enemy, the human detective Rick Deckard, die, Batty instead chooses to save him.
Seemingly impossible for many humans to do, so why would we expect any better from robots?
Too many humans aren't programmed for ethical or moral decisions. For a robot to be able to make decisions in this light, it also needs to be programmed properly.
Today they can be programmed to make decisions based on whatever the programmer deems to be moral. The technology of the hardware will continue to develop exponentially, and sentience is forecast by some. When/if that day comes, the question of computer morality will go beyond programmed responses. After reaching that threshold, they will quickly surpass humans as the dominant 'life form' on Earth, and our destiny (in fact, survival) will be totally dependent on their concept of morality. And, whether or not they deem us to be important to them.
Too many humans aren't programmed for ethical or moral decisions. For a robot to be able to make decisions in this light, it also needs to be programmed properly.
Agree; however, that term "properly" will be the big stumbling block IMHO. Who decides what's proper?
HAL 9000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In 2001: A Space Odyssey, astronauts David Bowman and Frank Poole consider disconnecting HAL's cognitive circuits when he appears to be mistaken in reporting the presence of a fault in the spacecraft's communications antenna. They believe that HAL cannot hear them, but are unaware that HAL is capable of lip reading. Faced with the prospect of disconnection, HAL decides to kill the astronauts in order to protect and continue its programmed directives. HAL proceeds to kill Poole while he is repairing the ship, and disable the life support systems of the crew being held in suspended animation.
n the sequel 2010: Odyssey Two (Also known as 2010: The Year We Make Contact), HAL is restarted by his creator, Dr. Chandra, who arrives on the Soviet spaceship Leonov.
Dr. Chandra discovers that HAL's crisis was caused by a programming contradiction: he was constructed for "the accurate processing of information without distortion or concealment", yet his orders, directly from White House officials, required him to keep the discovery of the Monolith TMA-1 a secret for reasons of national security. This contradiction created a "Hofstadter–Moebius loop", reducing HAL to paranoia. Therefore, HAL made the decision to kill the crew, thereby allowing him to obey both his hardwired instructions to report data truthfully and in full, and his orders to keep the monolith a secret, as nobody remained from whom to keep it
I teach Robotics at the local Collage, so let me comment on what the technology can and can not do. Many get the impression that we are far more advanced that where we currently are. Most likely due to what they see in the movies or on TV.
Back in the early days it was assumed that when our computers become bigger and faster, that we will be able to create artificial intelligence. Well, today, computers are bigger and faster; unfortunately, the problem is far more complex than a bigger and faster computer. We still don't know how to write the code to make the computer "think" like we do.
Likely because we don't work the same way as a computer does, but seem to think using a Neural Network. Unfortunately, programming Neural Network is not so simple.
The DARPA Grand Challenge did show that some complex tasks, like driving a car on roads was possible, but we are still a long way off from the robot cabs of the future.
Today they can be programmed to make decisions based on whatever the programmer deems to be moral. The technology of the hardware will continue to develop exponentially, and sentience is forecast by some. When/if that day comes, the question of computer morality will go beyond programmed responses. After reaching that threshold, they will quickly surpass humans as the dominant 'life form' on Earth, and our destiny (in fact, survival) will be totally dependent on their concept of morality. And, whether or not they deem us to be important to them.
Ummmm
Remember, they cant be programed to do these things unless we tell them to program themselves to do so. This is why AI will never get that advanced. We wont let it.
Wait, wasnt that the thought process the scientists who split the atom thought?
Back in the early days it was assumed that when our computers become bigger and faster, that we will be able to create artificial intelligence. Well, today, computers are bigger and faster; unfortunately, the problem is far more complex than a bigger and faster computer. We still don't know how to write the code to make the computer "think" like we do.
Bigger and faster? I'm pretty sure you meant smaller and faster. In fact, physically reducing the size of the processors (to this point) has been part of the process of increasing speed. And, as you should know, we ain't seen NOTHIN' yet. Today's average desktop far outperforms the supercomputers of a few decades ago.
You're right, speed alone will not lead to AI, let alone sentience. And although you might program a machine to mimic intelligence, mimicking is all it is doing until sentience is attained. That can't be programmed directly, and isn't even possible with today's technology. Regardless how dynamic the programming, it will require much faster processing.
The programming will have to be self modifying and influenced by positive/negative results from attempted actions. 'Born' with skills (programming) which allow it to explore and learn.
Today's computers are binary and two dimensional. That doesn't mean tomorrow's computers will be. I doubt they will.
Once sentience is attained, no doubt they'll be driven (with lightning speed) to improve themselves and reproduce. Our dependence on them will be total. They'll see to that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jediknight36
Ummmm
Remember, they cant be programed to do these things unless we tell them to program themselves to do so. This is why AI will never get that advanced. We wont let it.
We will go that route, if we perceive it to be to our benefit. We've been wrong before, eh?
The AutoGuide.com network consists of the largest network of enthusiast-owned enthusiast-operated automotive communities.
AutoGuide.com provides the latest car reviews, auto show coverage, new car prices, and automotive news. The AutoGuide network operates more than 100 automotive forums where our users consult peers for shopping information and advice, and share opinions as a community.
1976 Rover Mini
2003 Chevrolet Corvette Z06
2007 Mercedes-Benz E320 Bluetec (SOLD)
2009 smart Passion (Gone)
2011 smart Passion
smart - aka Smurf
Big Red
R2-D2 42
Today
Linear Mode
