What if the robot becomes CEO?
Then we will have robots doing jail-time in cases like Enron.
Were that the case, robot CEOs would quickly become the norm. Just in case.
Europe's robots to become 'electronic persons' under draft plan
31–40 of 56 posts
Re: Europe's robots to become 'electronic persons' under draft plan
#32Re: Europe's robots to become 'electronic persons' under draft plan
#33I can't tell what this is supposed to mean. Taxing employers for using robots as if they were human employees might be a good idea. But giving robots 'rights and obligations' as if they were human is totally insane.
They just want taxes and the ability to control robots "replacing" workers.
[deleted]
Re: Europe's robots to become 'electronic persons' under draft plan
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, someday we might inevitably need to discuss robot rights, but that'd be somewhere past the point where we can declare a robot a sentient being. ;)
Why is being 'sentient' (a vague term) a requirement for something to have rights?
Until it is sentient, it's just a hammer with pre-programmed response. After that, it can define itself.
Re: Europe's robots to become 'electronic persons' under draft plan
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, someday we might inevitably need to discuss robot rights, but that'd be somewhere past the point where we can declare a robot a sentient being. ;)
Why is being 'sentient' (a vague term) a requirement for something to have rights?
I'm certain in this context "rights" refers to the rights regularly afforded to human beings (as in the european proposal), not to the rights we might assign to non-sentient animals.
In any case, it seems to me that we don't understand consciousness and life enough to truly define any requirement for rights any better than the meaning of 'sentience'.
Re: Europe's robots to become 'electronic persons' under draft plan
#36Re: Europe's robots to become 'electronic persons' under draft plan
#37Robot rights make sense to prepare for a time when there is rough intellectual parity between humans and robots and the possibility of an adversarial relationship arises. I think it's unlikely, but still important, given the impact such a relationship would have. Giving robots human rights now would be like giving an ant human rights, but it makes sense to give rights in accordance with some measure of intelligence I…
The fact that you know you are aware, shouldn't be even possible to begin with. What I am getting at is that I don't think there a physical explanation for it. If that is the case, then there is no reason for a robot to have rights, regardless of how human it seems.
Re: Europe's robots to become 'electronic persons' under draft plan
#38Re: Europe's robots to become 'electronic persons' under draft plan
#39People are missing the point of robots.
Robots have the potential to give us what we've always wanted but could never ethically achieve: slaves. We want capable beings to do our bidding. To serve us, to build for us, to obey us. If we follow some nonsensical robotic social justice, we can lose this.
This type of stipulation is also an example of innovation-hindering regulation, and what a surprise, it's coming from the bureaucratic EU. Social security payable by robot owners. If I'm smarter and use something to compete more efficiently and productively, I'm penalized. Socialism in a nutshell: take from the bright, redistribute to the dim.
"But this time it's different!" We didn't tax the first people to create and operate the drill press, the lathe, or the milling station. Or the sewing machine for that matter.
Re: Europe's robots to become 'electronic persons' under draft plan
#40How do they even define a robot? Is an asea automatic welder a robot? A pick-and-place unit? I'd be more than happy to postpone this question until the robots ask to be recognized as persons, until then the robots that I see are more like powertools able to do repetitive jobs with a high repeat accuracy. They are not 'persons' in any way that I recognize (but that may change, we are simply too far away from that to s…
>> "I'd be more than happy to postpone this question until the robots ask to be recognized as persons"
Using that logic, no human should have rights unless they're able to express it; clearly flawed logic.
>> "They are not 'persons' in any way that I recognize (but that may change, we are simply too far away from that to spend time on this right now)."
Assuming no "human like" AI exist already is problematic. What if I told you that (insert advanced research lab) had AI that's behavior was identical to that of any random child you might met. Do you believe they deserve to know about the world, or should they be kept from the world? Do you believe the world has the right to know about them, or is it okay to keep their existence a secret? Should the artificial child the same rights as any child?