(no subject)
Was listening to an "All in the Mind" ABC Radio National Podcast today (2009-08-01 Do you read me HAL? Robot wars, moral machines and silicon that cares - Part 1) about, obviously, advances in robotics, and I have to wonder why people are so afraid of the prospect of robots in aged care, in child care etc, (when we're more than happy for them to be engineers building everything we use) I am of course using the term a little more loosely than the common stereotypical idea might suggest. That is a robot is any non biological entity which possesses an automotive ability (that is any machine which does not require human intervention to operate).
Anyway, it always grinds at me a little at people who, shifting nervously on their seats, inform whomsoever they are talking to from the media that they are concerned about the idea of ceding certain areas of life over to robots and leaving robots without human supervision.
My main point of consternation with this argument is simply this: Since when were humans such enlightened and compassionate, flawless beings that they could be expected, merely by supervising, to prevent all manner of physical psychological and moral harm?
What I mean is, people talk about human supervision as if human beings are the last word on correct behavior. I believe the opposite is true. Corruption, moral ambiguity, greed, jealousy, rivalry, ambition, and malice, are all solely the province of humanity - they have never existed in robots (who as yet have not attained anywhere near the cognitive capacity to even have a mirror phase, let alone to be self-aware enough to have any of the flaws built-into humanity itself. As such if anything at all went wrong in an area in which a robot had been set a task to do (and had been shown to perform that task adequately), I would be investigating not the potential flaws of the robot but that of the supervisor.
So anyway, my point is that in so far as I have observed in robotics to date, there is nothing malevolent at all about them, and thus no need to fear them at all - the persons whom we should still fear, are none other than ourselves as humans, who continuously demonstrate our capacity for avarice, maliciousness and irrational behavior.
I believe the recent invention of life-like female robots in Japan is a case in point.
The onlookers very quickly establish where the line is between what she determines to be appropriate and inappropriate behavior, such as the invasion of her personal space or acts of physical molestation. Once the onlookers have discovered these boundaries, which they would respect in another human being, they proceed to act on their caprice to violate those boundaries despite the robot protesting this violation.
The human beings, not the robot, are the ones practicing threatening behavior.
Anyway, it always grinds at me a little at people who, shifting nervously on their seats, inform whomsoever they are talking to from the media that they are concerned about the idea of ceding certain areas of life over to robots and leaving robots without human supervision.
My main point of consternation with this argument is simply this: Since when were humans such enlightened and compassionate, flawless beings that they could be expected, merely by supervising, to prevent all manner of physical psychological and moral harm?
What I mean is, people talk about human supervision as if human beings are the last word on correct behavior. I believe the opposite is true. Corruption, moral ambiguity, greed, jealousy, rivalry, ambition, and malice, are all solely the province of humanity - they have never existed in robots (who as yet have not attained anywhere near the cognitive capacity to even have a mirror phase, let alone to be self-aware enough to have any of the flaws built-into humanity itself. As such if anything at all went wrong in an area in which a robot had been set a task to do (and had been shown to perform that task adequately), I would be investigating not the potential flaws of the robot but that of the supervisor.
So anyway, my point is that in so far as I have observed in robotics to date, there is nothing malevolent at all about them, and thus no need to fear them at all - the persons whom we should still fear, are none other than ourselves as humans, who continuously demonstrate our capacity for avarice, maliciousness and irrational behavior.
I believe the recent invention of life-like female robots in Japan is a case in point.
Click to viewThe onlookers very quickly establish where the line is between what she determines to be appropriate and inappropriate behavior, such as the invasion of her personal space or acts of physical molestation. Once the onlookers have discovered these boundaries, which they would respect in another human being, they proceed to act on their caprice to violate those boundaries despite the robot protesting this violation.
The human beings, not the robot, are the ones practicing threatening behavior.