Could a robot be any uses to us if it had the 3 laws?
1. A robot may not harm a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence, as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Like say we use them to make tobaco or Twinkies.
2006-07-05 12:38:16 · 8 answers · asked by psych0bug 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Maybe i should have put this question in software.
2006-07-05 12:38:53 · update #1
We should make them like the Cylons on Battlestar Glactica.
2006-07-08 17:12:02 · answer #1 · answered by Deaf Bug 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
lil quote
"I prefer robot law to god law,"
Well i think both are made by humans so what's the difference there??
BTW Yeah we could use robots. We could reformat or hack them so they wouldn't obey the law so 3 laws have no sense (BTW if someone think they have sens well i guess if we would crate real AI then robots would be smart enough to make bypass to those law and we would ahmmm disapear from earth soon LMAO (well we will so ahmmm that was't so smart LMFKAO)
2006-07-07 08:39:39 · answer #2 · answered by RubenS 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sounds like the majority of the Human race to me. Unthinking and unquestioning.
2006-07-05 19:47:32 · answer #3 · answered by Jules G 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes . and you don't make tobacco you grow it and who was the last person killed by a Twinky. Neither Tobacco nor Twinkies really kill you over indulgence in them are good but so is too much oxygen.
2006-07-05 19:48:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I prefer robot law to god law, but manlaw is always it for me
2006-07-05 19:42:18 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You are taking a piece of fiction and trying to apply its philosphy to real life.
Are you trying to start a religion or something?
2006-07-05 19:41:49 · answer #6 · answered by Hillbillies are... 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Asimov posited we could, but this website has more of an discussion
http://www.asimovlaws.com/
2006-07-05 19:41:48 · answer #7 · answered by rosends 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Asimov seemed to think so.
2006-07-05 19:42:48 · answer #8 · answered by awigdahl 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋