But they're literally programmed right into the AI. It has no choice but to obey them. I'm saying that that takes away what makes it special, it ceases to be what it was and becomes just another robot slave. And not only that, but the code would be contradicting itself. On the one hand, the AI was programmed to be free thinking and almost human, on the other hand, it's got these 3 laws that it can't break even if it wants to.Alex_P said:
....... I was talking about the three laws, not all of the code, just about incorporating the three laws into the code. Of course it needs code, but you shouldn't program the three laws into it if you want it to be truly free thinking.perfectimo said:
Ah, but socially-constructed ideas lie at the very heart of our understanding of reality and our sense of self.Eipok Kruden said:
I think I am a little confused, I read about 60% of this thread but I guess I'll have to go back. What I think you are getting at is that you want to program a robot to do whatever it wants then restrict what it does through teaching it as opposed to programming it?Eipok Kruden said:
To people, morals are more like guidelines, we can break them if absolutely necessary. If our lives or the lives of loved ones or the greater whole are threatened, we can do whatever is necessary. If we programmed them into John's code, he'd have no choice. While he'd still try to save himself, he'd try to save others as well. Think about it, if he had morals and the power went out, he could've used a small amount of power to unlock the door, let the psychologist out, and temporarily power the elevator or or at least direct him into the server farm where it's cool. But, unfortunately, he had no morals so he didn't think anything of the man's life.Alex_P said:
Isn't that worse because you are "giving" it ethics in the form of forced teaching?Eipok Kruden said:
Well, think of the morals as guidelines. We want the AI to respect human life, not to disregard it. We don't want him to steal or kill or anything like that. And you should try to read through the thread some more. I don't want to force them on him, I want him to develop them on his own based on a general understanding of the world that we provide him. You see, I think of the AI as a human child and I'm against indoctrination like some parents use. I think morals should be formed through knowledge and experience, like how I and many others formed them. Not through religion or indoctrination and brainwashing. Knowledge, not the lack of it. It shouldn't be forced on him.perfectimo said:
Would you say then that the robot would be roaming free without somebody with them and telling them how to react to certain situations?Eipok Kruden said:
In order to use utilitarianism, we have to describe why society is important to him. He's smarter and more advanced than humans and he's in the body of a t-888. I don't see how society is actually important to him, I mean what can society provide him? He doesn't need protection, food, water, or shelter. You fire a thousand bullets into him and he'll get back up as if nothing happened. This is the dilemma, finding something that works or getting something and making it work without forcing it on him or limiting his knowledge.swampboy32904 said:
Yea, a lot harder than I thought it would be when I started this topic. 5 Pages and we still haven't come up with a good way to teach John Henry morals or ethics or even a basic guideline.swampboy32904 said:
Your point? We're not talking about teaching morals to humans, we're talking about teaching morals to an AI. Specifically, John Henry, the early version of Skynet. It's from Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles.superpandaman said:
Too many people have already proved how stupid that guy is. Please stay on topic. Teaching John Henry morals, not bashing some idiotic comment by some right wing conservative.superpandaman said:
