Rights of Robots Luke Branson
Robot Rights = A.I. Rights Robot- a machine resembling a human being and A.I. - an area of computer science that emphasizes able to replicate certain human movements and the creation of intelligent machines that work and functions automatically. react like humans
What is a person? ● A Human Being? ○ Slavery ○ Genocide ● Something/someone that possesses certain traits ○ Self-awareness ○ Intelligence ○ Conscious ○ Free will ○ Doesn’t include certain Humans ● There are problems to looking at only either of these. ● Alien Life?
Rights for ● Animal Rights ○ Against Animal Cruelty Non-Humans ● Robots? ● Aliens?
her Operating Systems ● Love ●
Westworld Amusement park “Wild West” ● Occupied by A.I. ● Newcomers (real people) ● Rape and Murder ●
Ex Machina Turing Test ●
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5t6K9iwcdw Sophia ● Activated February 14, 2016 ● Citizen of Saudi Arabia ● Facial Recognition ● Gestures
● The year is 2176 ● ISSAC (Intelligent, Speaking, Sarcastic, Affectionate, Computer) is developed by Spunky Electronics Case Study #1 ● ISSAC doesn’t have a body he lives inside of a super computer ● He is extremely smart ● He has a sarcastic sense of humor ● He genuinely cares for human beings as a whole and works to solve problems to help the human race. ● Many people who work with ISSAC have strong relationships with him and view him as a friend. ● Many people view ISSAC as a person ● ISSAC accidentally hurts the feelings of one of the investors of Spunky Electronics due to a sarcastic remark he makes. ● The investor demands he is shut down permanently. ● ISSAC doesn’t want to be shut down permanently, since that would be equal to death for him ● Is it ethical to shut down ISSAC or does he deserve the right to Life?
Is ISSAC a person? ISSAC is not a human being, however: ISSAC has emotions. ISSAC is self aware and can relate to others. ISSAC has value to others as a person. ISSAC is a person and has the right to live.
Kantian Evaluation The investor wants to shut down (Kill) ISSAC to get revenge for the damaged feelings caused by ISSAC’s sarcasm. Universal Rule: It is okay to kill others to get revenge. The investor would not want to die because he hurt someone’s feeling. Under the first Formulation: This is UNETHICAL The Investor is disregarding the ISSAC’s right to life and killing him as a means to get revenge. Under the second formulation: This is UNETHICAL
Act Utilitarian Evaluation Shutting Down ISSAC: Not Shutting Down ISSAC: Happiness of people who want him gone: +1 Annoyance to those who want him gone: -1 Sadness of those who love him: -2 Happiness to those who love him: +2 Keeping investor: +1 Potential loss of investor: -1 Harm caused by not finding solutions to problems Solutions found by ISSAC: +5 ISSAC is working on: -5 Total: 5 Total: -5
Case Study #2 ● The year is 2033 ● The Tech Company DitchBot Inc. Develops a construction worker bot made to dig ditches. ● The Bot is called Doug ● Doug has no feelings, he cares not to live or die. ● Doug cannot talk, all he understands is the command dig and the command stop. ● Is it ethical to work Doug without pay or any kind of compensation?
Is Doug a person? Doug is not a person Doug has no feelings Doug cares not if he lives or if he dies Doug is not a person
Kantian Evaluation DitchBot Inc. Makes Doug did Universal Rule: It is okay to make Robots work without compensation. Under the first Formulation: This is ETHICAL Universal Rule (If Doug was a person): It is okay to make others work without compensation. The people at DitchBot Inc. would not want to be uncompensated for work. Under the first Formulation: This is UNETHICAL DitchBot is using Doug as a means to make money. Under the second formulation: This is ETHICAL
Act Utilitarian Evaluation Compensating Doug for Work: Working Doug without compensation: Pleasure that Doug gets from getting paid: 0 Pain received by Doug for being unpaid: 0 DitchBot has to the people who want ditches dug No extra charge to pay Doug for his work: +1 more money to pay Doug: -1 Total: 1 Potential loss of job for human laborer to pay Doug: -1 Total: -2
My Opinion: Right now there is no reason for Robots, or A.I. to have any rights. The Robots and A.I. that we have today are not powerful at all and are not advanced enough to deserve any rights. In the future when we progress more with Robots and their A.I. they will probably deserve rights. Who knows, maybe one day humans will prefer to find love in Robots and A.I. over finding it in other Humans.
Recommend
More recommend
