The field of robotics has changed dramatically during the last 30 years. The first mobile robots with any degree of autonomy did not receive attention until the 1970s-80s. Since then, major strides have been made, including applications of learning, interaction, robot cooperation, and simulated emotions. But the issue on the table right now is this: are robots capable of moral or ethical reasoning? This question is no longer a farfetched science fiction fantasy – the question itself has been put to the United Nations. I am sympathetic to the spirit of the motivation behind such a project – humans should try to develop ethical machines in hopes to eliminate human suffering. Yet as it stands, there are several major problems with this view. Although robotic warfare has the potential to diminish casualties and human suffering in future wars, the possibility of artificial intelligence learning ethical understanding to the standard held in warfare today is near outlandish at best. Automated warfare has many complications that humans would still be held responsible for concerning the morality of war, and there is not an algorithm capable of understanding human compassion. Foresight is critical to both minimize undesirable consequences as well as influence the benefits of technology. The issue must be approached in a critical manner, as to assure a task as large as this is handled properly. The idea of robots fighting wars leads to limitless possibilities. A robot, for the purpose
Singer describes Iraq operations as they were being performed in 2008 with the threat of Improvised Explosive Devices, IEDs. “The Explosive Ordnance Disposal, EOD, teams were tasked with defeating this threat, roving about the battlefield to find and defuse the IEDs before they could explode and kill.” 3 Robots such as Packbot and Talon were used to disarm IEDs which save lives of Soldiers and civilians. The proliferation of technology in the battlefield can be seen in today’s combat environment on the ground, sea and air and will continue to grow. He states that “man’s monopoly of warfare is being broken” because digital weapons such as Packbot, Talon, SWORDS, Predator, Global Hawk and many others are a “sign” that “we are entering the era of robots of war.” 4 He supports his theory of the proliferation of technology in weapons by looking at industry growth by providing quantifiable data of rapid growth in industry to meet demands. As he states “in 1999, there were nine companies with federal contracts in homeland security. By 2003, there were 3,512. In 2006, there were 33,890.” 5 Mr. Singer then provides a history of robots, trends, and what we can expect in the future. The book also provides a glimpse of what the author believes can be expected on future battlefields and changes that he thinks U.S. policy makers and military leaders need to address. Some of the changes that can be affected concern law of war, robots role in war, level of robot authority to fight wars and robot
Recently technology has become a significant part of society, specifically for the medical field. People in the past have expressed concerns about the security and safety of implementing artificial intelligence (AI) into the medical field. Artificial intelligence is a computer system with human capabilities, such as decision making. Research has shown that AI could increase the efficiency and quality of patient care in the medical field. AI could greatly improve efficiency by using software that can analyze all of the symptoms the patient has and the patient’s family history in a shorter period of time than a human doctor could. For the time period from 2000 to 2010 the conversation about artificial intelligence was focused on the ethical
With Robots becoming a popular part of our everyday lives people are beginning to question if people are treating robots with the same respect that they treat people with. Researchers are also beginning to wonder if there need to be laws to protect robots from being tortured or even killed. Scientists have done research to test and see if people react the same to robots as they would to actual people or animals. In Is it Okay to Torture or Murder a Robot Richard Fisher contemplates the reason on why it is wrong to hurt or kill a robot by using a stern and unbiased tone.
Pertaining to the article regarding artificial intelligence, there are numerous beneficial possibilities to aid in U.S. military defense and other necessary involvements. For instance, perfected facial recognition will allow the judgement of crimes to be made easier and less time-consuming. However, there are negative possibilities that tend to create concern in artificial intelligence; with this intention, artificial intelligence is now able to manipulate media such as audio or video to make decisions; if they are able to manipulate their decisions, these robots can threaten or cause damage to the United States’ military alliance. Furthermore, the possibility of these events may occur in the United States or any more developed countries’ military facility or even a battlefield. Although scientists and innovators are tampering with artificial intelligence; if overdeveloped, it is unknown what might occur to U.S. citizens. The journalist presents the significance of this event as life-threatening and a possible ending to human existence, this event is written to raise awareness or possibly turn away to another direction other than artificial intelligence.
In Death by Robot, Robin Henig talks about what goes into the decision making of the robots and the types of decisions that a robot will have to make, including the difficult ones. For one, he talks about the algorithm that goes into effect when a robot is in a sticky situation. For example, when a patient of the robot is asking for medicine, the robot has to check with the supervisor, but the supervisor is not reachable. This is a situation in which the robot is in a “hypothetical dilemma.” The robot is commanded to make its patient pain-free but only if it can get permission to give the patient medicine from the supervisor. Henig also talks about what the experts in the emerging field of robot morality are going so that robots are able to
One risk of artificial intelligence is that machines can malfunction and not know when to stop advancing on the enemy or distinguish between an enemy and a citizen, and not have a risk of unnecessary carnage. Today’s modern warfare is high-paced, mobile, and technologically advanced. It has been stated that “today’s sophisticated weapons can malfunction, be too lethal, and their speed and effective range reduces reaction time and decreases the ability to distinguish
In recent years technology has begun to grow at an astounding rate. Within the article “The Pentagon’s ‘Terminator conundrum” one such advancement in technology is discussed, describing the utilization of autonomous weapons within the military and the possibility of utilizing them to supersede human soldiers. While such technology seems like it wouldn’t be feasible till the distant future, the concept is presently being tested in military based drones within the pentagon. Some people disagree with the notion of giving machines the competency to make autonomous decisions on the battlefield, particularly the use of lethal force, believing machines aren’t trustworthy and could result in greater loss of life. If we were to ask an ancient philosopher
Ever wonder whether robots are more reliable than humans? Are they able to do tasks that humans cannot? Are they adequate guardians for children? In the story “Robbie” by Isaac Asimov, robots are more reliable than humans. Through this paper I will examine the ways in which robots are more reliable than humans in the story, through the incorporation of an article about pediatric therapy robots.
Lately there have been more and more smart machines that have been taking over regular human tasks but as it grows the bigger picture is that robots will take over a lot of tasks now done by people. But, many people think that there are important ethical and moral issues that have to be dealt with this. Sooner or later there is going to be a robot that will interact in a humane manner but there are many questions to be asked like; how will they interact with us? Do we really want machines that are independent, self-directed, and has affect and emotion? I think we do, because they can provide many benefits. Obviously, as with all technologies, there are dangers as well. We need to ensure that people always
The article “Here’s a Terrible Idea: Robot Cars with Adjustable Ethics Settings,” presents a very interesting dilemma I had not considered before. In theory, it makes sense that an intelligent vehicle could have the capability to determine who and where to wreck should the decision be needed. Unfortunately, the ethical robot car idea is problematic, and comes with numerous moral issues.
Another big ethical issue raised in the move is whether or not robots could be used to fight wars. This ethical issue just likes the other in the fact that it revolves on the lack of emotional or compassion component of the robots. Robots can be programed for the protection of individuals but because of their lack of compassion or emotion they would not know when to stop the attack.
Imagine, for a second, a not-so-distant future produced not by humans, but a dystopian society engineered by humanity's most amoral of computational artificial intelligence. Built without empathy by their equally emotionless robotic predecessors. Robots that make robots which make more robots, which could make more robots to divide and diversify. Robots that learn and develop based on their interactions, and robots that respond to a variety of external stimuli. Each robot has the capability to learn and store informational data. This matrix of machines uses the remains of our biological and chemical energies, humans: young, old, babies, adults and everything else that could no longer contribute to their robotic overlords, as batteries to power themselves as they systematically replace human life with their robotic and psychopathic need for efficiency. To perfection, for flesh tears and withers, but metal is eternal. But don't worry, these billions of robots have been provided with a manual of the Laws of Robotic Interactions with Humans ... to share.
As an inventor, I waited impatiently as my army of robots had commenced to turn on. Through their creation, they were given various sizes, shapes, and colors so that I could tell what I mainly created them to do in the uprising. They received throngs of weapons. I made myself the main general of the umpteen of robots. Saving the world went hand-in-hand with destroying evil technology which threatened to rule this generation and more.
What image comes to mind when one hears the words “Killer Robot”? If one visualises the laser-wielding android in Terminator 2 which threatens to overpower its defenceless human adversaries, one would not be too far from the truth[1]. Today, advanced robots capable of engaging a human target autonomously are no longer confined to fiction but are instead rapidly becoming a reality.
Hollywood blockbusters such as Terminator and Terminator Two have fueled the idea of artificial intelligence taking on humanoid characteristics and taking over the world. Let me answer the last question once and for all. It is not possible for a robot to think, feel, or act for itself, it may be programmed to mimic the actions, but not experience the real thing. We can program them to react to a certain stimulus, but a robot cannot and will never be able to comprehend, have feelings genuine guilt and much less act without the use of a programmer some were along the line. The second question is also a rather simple one. Of course there are robots that should not be created. For example, robots made for the sole purpose of mass destruction or robots made with the intention of harm to