One law down, two to go? iRobot, manufacturer of the Roomba vacuum, has teamed up with Taser to arm its Packbot robots with stun guns. But it’s hard to say whether this is actually a violation of the first of science fiction author Isaac Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics: “A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.” Clearly, arming a robot with a stun gun is the first step towards breaking that rule. But the Packbots, currently used as bomb inspectors in Iraq, are remote-controlled. If there’s a human operator standing at a distance with his finger on the Taser trigger, is it really the robot that’s doing the harm? Yeah, probably. But please discuss.—Gregory Mone
One law down, two to go? iRobot, manufacturer of the Roomba vacuum, has teamed up with Taser to arm its Packbot robots with stun guns. But it’s hard to say whether this is actually a violation of the first of science fiction author Isaac Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics: “A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.” Clearly, arming a robot with a stun gun is the first step towards breaking that rule. But the Packbots, currently used as bomb inspectors in Iraq, are remote-controlled. If there’s a human operator standing at a distance with his finger on the Taser trigger, is it really the robot that’s doing the harm? Yeah, probably. But please discuss.—Gregory Mone
Asimov's laws were for robots that had human level intelligence (or better.) IRobot's creations can be outthought by a cockroach. We should be more concerned about the ethics of the people using the things. Gitmo, Abu Ghraib, Warrantless Wiretapping anyone?
Posted by: EGN | June 30, 2007 at 12:13 PM
The three laws plus one can be compared to tools, as the man himself did. 1 A tool mustn't harm its user, so a knife will have a handle and a cable will have its jacket. 2 A tool must perform its intended use without hurting the user. 3 A tool must be durable enough to be used.
However, a zeroth law was added later on, that states that a robot must act not only in the interest of the individual human, but it in the interest of all of humanity, and may not bring harm to humanity through action or inaction. In the best interest of humanity, that taser robot must act.
Posted by: Peter Smedskjaer | July 01, 2007 at 04:33 PM
How is this any worse than a Predator armed with a Hellfire missile? Both the iRobot and Predator are robots, both are remotely operated, and the missile is slightly more lethal than a Taser I think. Furthermore, armed Predators have been around for 5 years. Does a Taser-armed iRobot really introduce any new questions?
Posted by: Question mark | July 03, 2007 at 01:03 AM
Where can I buy robot arms?
Not that I absolutely need them or anything. I just think it would be the climax of badassery.
Posted by: generic viagra | March 23, 2010 at 10:40 AM
I think this would be the violation of the product and may be people would misuse it eventually when they know that how these rifled arms work. Very informative article.
For used computers log on to http://www.electrocomputerwarehouse.com
Posted by: cheap computer | June 15, 2010 at 05:41 AM