Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Social > Jet Blast
Reload this Page >

Can you murder a Robot?

Jet Blast Topics that don't fit the other forums. Rules of Engagement apply.

Can you murder a Robot?

Old 17th Mar 2019, 07:48
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 4DME
Posts: 1,702
Can you murder a Robot?

A Sunday morning read.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-47090174
N707ZS is online now  
Old 17th Mar 2019, 23:21
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 142
Might be interesting to see how peoples attitude changes right after they watch Terminator
cdtaylor_nats is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2019, 00:18
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: yes
Posts: 136
I think Star Trek covered that when someone tried to dismantle Data but lost their case when it was proved Data was a senseint being.
Yeah silly science fiction but wait the vegans are on the march. Wait until they try and prove animals are people too.
​​​​
I'm not even joking about that.
Steepclimb is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2019, 10:28
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,871
Of course the robot wasn’t a sentient being (is anyone claiming it was?) but that doesn’t alter the fact that whoever smashed it up is a grade one jerk.
ShotOne is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2019, 10:56
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: Mesopotamos
Posts: 1,174
Can you murder a robot?
I think you should just throw a bucket of cold water over that idea.
cattletruck is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2019, 12:18
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 71
Posts: 1,553
We already see court cases where people fight over a patient in a PVS (Persistent Vegetative State), often with no higher mental functions, kept barely alive by a lot of life support machinery. There you have a sort of cyborg, and the trouble starts when it is arguable that what makes us human, our higher mental functions, have slipped away and are never coming back. All that is left is a sort of robot, really.

Stanley Kubrick dealt with this back in the Sixties in "2001: A Space Odyssey," when a crewmember "killed" the HAL 9000 computer that controlled his space craft. Hal was a computer with seemingly human intelligence, as shown by the way he tried to murder the entire crew.
chuks is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2019, 13:31
  #7 (permalink)  
Cunning Artificer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The spiritual home of DeHavilland
Age: 71
Posts: 3,106
I could murder a pint of Tiger right now.
Blacksheep is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2019, 14:23
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,871
Kubrick certainly raised the question but you couldn’t say he “dealt with” it. The murder bit may come up but so far this instance is undeniably a criminal offence and a vicious and spiteful one at that since the “robot” was designed to be an object of interest and affection to (sentient) humans. Surely anyone could appreciate ripping up a child’s teddy bear would cause hurt beyond the material value of a fabric toy?
ShotOne is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2019, 14:56
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Germany
Posts: 55
Originally Posted by ShotOne View Post
Kubrick certainly raised the question but you couldn’t say he “dealt with” it. The murder bit may come up but so far this instance is undeniably a criminal offence and a vicious and spiteful one at that since the “robot” was designed to be an object of interest and affection to (sentient) humans. Surely anyone could appreciate ripping up a child’s teddy bear would cause hurt beyond the material value of a fabric toy?
what is this all about?
Blohm is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2019, 11:07
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 71
Posts: 1,553
Isaac Asimov posited three rules for robots:

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 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.

These rules were first presented by Asimov in I, Robot, often used in his later work, and taken for ineluctable. Kubrick turned this on its head in 2001: A Space Odyssey with his HAL 9000, a sort of huge robot, an artificial intelligence running a large space ship. Hal, as he is known by the crew, uses his machine logic to come to a logical decision that the humans aboard the ship must die. His killing by Dr. Bowman is thus quite justifiable, since Hal, if left alive, was going to kill him after already having killed the rest of the crew, already having attempted to kill Dr. Bowman by stranding him in space.

"Open the pod bay doors, Hal."

"I'm sorry, Dave. I can't do that." There the most chilling thing is the very mild and reasonable tone of voice in which Hal speaks, telling Dr. Bowman that he must kill him.

That left another us with another given to confront, the killing of a highly sympathetic, humanoid robot. That was addressed in A.I. Artificial Intelligence, where David, a childlike humanoid, is due to be destroyed, killed if you like, but then he is saved from that by a complicated series of events. Ironically, David is discovered millennia later as the sole remnant of humanity, enabling alien beings to resurrect his human "mother," albeit only for a day.

We will get further into this, I am sure.
chuks is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2019, 11:39
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: closer to hell
Age: 47
Posts: 890
Originally Posted by chuks View Post
Isaac Asimov posited three rules for robots:

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 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.

These rules were first presented by Asimov in I, Robot, often used in his later work, and taken for ineluctable. Kubrick turned this on its head in 2001: A Space Odyssey with his HAL 9000, a sort of huge robot, an artificial intelligence running a large space ship. Hal, as he is known by the crew, uses his machine logic to come to a logical decision that the humans aboard the ship must die. His killing by Dr. Bowman is thus quite justifiable, since Hal, if left alive, was going to kill him after already having killed the rest of the crew, already having attempted to kill Dr. Bowman by stranding him in space.

"Open the pod bay doors, Hal."

"I'm sorry, Dave. I can't do that." There the most chilling thing is the very mild and reasonable tone of voice in which Hal speaks, telling Dr. Bowman that he must kill him.

That left another us with another given to confront, the killing of a highly sympathetic, humanoid robot. That was addressed in A.I. Artificial Intelligence, where David, a childlike humanoid, is due to be destroyed, killed if you like, but then he is saved from that by a complicated series of events. Ironically, David is discovered millennia later as the sole remnant of humanity, enabling alien beings to resurrect his human "mother," albeit only for a day.

We will get further into this, I am sure.
probably the most boring movie. ever.
troppo is offline  
Old 19th Mar 2019, 21:41
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Coasting South
Age: 64
Posts: 22
Originally Posted by troppo View Post
probably the most boring movie. ever.
And probably one of the most ground breaking and influential.
hiflymk3 is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2019, 13:13
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 59°09N 002°38W (IATA: SOY, ICAO: EGER)
Age: 75
Posts: 800
ricardian is offline  
Old 20th Mar 2019, 21:59
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: A better place.
Posts: 1,477
Jeez Troppo - you'd be a whole lotta fun at a party.
tartare is offline  
Old 21st Mar 2019, 09:19
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,871
Strange how we’re concerned about the possible feelings of yet-to-be-invented “sentient” machines yet utterly unconcerned at the tens of millions of undeniably sentient animals which endure lives of utter misery before having their throats slit for us.
ShotOne is offline  
Old 23rd Mar 2019, 17:53
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: yes
Posts: 136
Originally Posted by ShotOne View Post
Strange how we’re concerned about the possible feelings of yet-to-be-invented “sentient” machines yet utterly unconcerned at the tens of millions of undeniably sentient animals which endure lives of utter misery before having their throats slit for us.
Oh I don't know the cows round here seem really relaxed and content. Same with the sheep.

Here's the vegan vision of the future. Sitting round the table rather than on the table. Have to go now. I have a former sentient being in the oven. Yum yum.

Steepclimb is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.