Can a robot be a person? will be a very interesting decision and one not too far distant. It will define a lot of legal and societal issues for a good while. Maybe not forever but for at least a decade or more. There's a lot of money riding on the outcomes and variations and not all bets are going the same direction.
The term ROBOT comes from the Czech word, ROBOTA1 meaning FORCED LABOR and was invented by painter, writer, poet Josef Čapek2 circa 1920. The word was first used by his brother Karel Čapek3, a noted playwright, dramatist, and photographer, in his 1920 play R.U.R4. The word ROBOT stuck and now we have lots and lots of robots with many derivations like bot, cyborg, android, replicant, droid and drone for a few.
Josef Čapek was arrested by the Gestapo in 1939 and sent to the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, where he died circa 1945. His brother Karel Čapek died of pneumonia in December 1938 but the Gestapo, in an uncharacteristic loss of HUMINT, did not realize he was already dead when they went to arrest him, so they arrested his actress wife, Olga Scheinpflugová5, and interrogated her in his place.
It is not without some irony that the fate of the creators of the word ROBOT suffered such a backlash; highlighting the danger of the very things they tried to foreshadow in their play.
For what else is a ROBOT but a slave?
A machine is a mechanical device designed to perform some action6. We often think, only mechanical devices can be machines but there are software machines too. The distinction between them may be moot but the issues are not. There have been plenty of reactions to what they do and how they do it: fear, joy, loathing, envy, desire, control, power.
 |
| Hand Axe |
Machines have changed a lot in 3.3 million years and humans have a long-term relationship with them. The latest generation of machines are different and their use will impact a great deal of society and the world.
 |
| Antikythera Mechanism |
The hand axe will be doing it's own thing.
And this is were things get interesting because if there are no humans at all in the process, no humans to dump in the materials, no humans to start or stop the assembly line, no humans to pick up the finished goods, then we move into an interesting paradox.
One of the more prominent examples are self-driving cars. We've had human driven vehicles for eons, where charioteers, carriages, stage coaches, chauffeurs, taxis', buses and drivers took people to their destinations. The passenger just sat there but another human did the driving. Now we will have no human in control. There wont be a steering wheel, or brake or accelerator. You will get in and be whisked to your destination solely by voice or hand commands.
Sounds grand!
But if you've made it this far in my posts you'll know - it isn't all that grand. In fact it's not good, not good at all. It belongs right there with the I(DI)OT devices and Alexa/Siri/Google surveillance devices: in the dustbin.
But the focus for this post is: Can a Robot be a Person?
Why?
Because it matters and it matters a lot. A robot cannot be a HUMAN but can it be a PERSON? A lot hinges on the outcome.
So consider:
You are in your self-driving car, reclining on the faux-leather seats, watching the newest streamed costume drama, maybe having a snack out of the hot-cold food caddy and a fresh cuppa dispensed from the latest in micro-thimble beverage brewers while occasionally peeking at the view through the tinted black windows.
And
- Your car strikes a pedestrian
- Your car runs into another car
- Your car stops and you get rear ended
- Your car speeds up exceeding the speed limit
- Your car kills you when it slams into a barrier
These cases are right from recent news but they have been "considered" for a long time by those who work on setting up "Safe. Reliable. Repeatable." instructions for machines. And so far the answers are Not Good. It's not that the people doing the thinking and programming are incompetent ... well maybe some are ... but the modern world of computer technology and development is not suited to find answers where there are No Good Answers. Someone wants to make a quick buck and your life is of no consequence in their calculations about how much money they are going to make.
If the car is not under human control
then
- directly (like stepping on the brake)
- indirectly (like telling the driver what to do)
- Who is at fault?
We DO like to ascribe faults and someone is gonna go down for running over the person on the bicycle.
So we have a number of possibilities:
- The car manufacturer
- The software manufacturer
- The brake component manufacturer
- The sensor device manufacturer
- The sensor software application creator
- The dealership
- The insurance company
- The International standards boards
- The Federal standards boards
- The State standards boards
- The occupant
- The victim
The list is much longer but you get the idea.
Our old rules, some of which work and some that don't, prescribed actions, penalties, punishment and compensation for most everything but this wont be enough any more.
Why?
Because you are no longer In Control of the machine. Therefore you cannot be responsible for what the machine does because the machine is doing its own thing with or without you. Well ... you MIGHT be responsible even so ... that's one of the Big Questions.
"Can a robot be a person?" is important is because in the USA we have an existing Supreme Court decision that allows Corporations to be People. It's called Citizen's United11.
Corporations are tax entities where people pool their monies to create a business and opt for a specific type of taxation. When corporations are created everyone agrees to this treatment. It isn't a surprise. It's not an OMG moment. It's a specific selection with forms and fees and IRS approval that money from the corporation will be taxed differently than the taxes assigned to individuals.
If a corporation, a purely tax created entity can obtain the rights of a person, what about a robot?
When such a case rises high enough through the legal realms the outcome will be
V E R Y I N T E R E S T I N G
If a robot is held to have personhood, like a corporation, then clearly the robot is at fault. No one else needs to worry about anything. The robot might be sentenced to be dismantled or as in the case of C-3PO, get a memory flush.
Isaac Asimov12 explored some of the consequences of advanced robots in a series of 5 science fiction novels and 38 science fiction short stories. Asimov defined Three Laws for his robots:
- A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
- A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
- A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
Nice! Lets use those!
Unfortunately, this doesn't include corporations or greed or malware or poorware or crapware or any other defect as having any influence in the robot's actions. It presumes all software is without flaws: intentional or otherwise. Asimov redefined, eliminated and explored numerous variations in his many stories.
Trying to limit the unlimited is pretty tough, even for a robot.
We have something called AI/MI being touted as the brains of these systems. AI is a complicated field but there is No Intelligence13 to be found in most applications. Instead there are series upon series upon series of defined rules that can be augmented or manipulated but are not anywhere near "intelligence". These systems can calculate things faster than humans and can determine microscopic differences between items but they are not "intelligent". They only appear to be that way; the same way that automated clock tower Jacquemart bellstrikers appeared to be intelligent to people in the medieval period.
 |
| Jacquemart Bellstrikers |
Some interesting implications of automated systems have been explored by Sci Fi authors, in movies and on TV where plot lines in which computer simulations achieve true self-awareness and are then granted Personhood and Rights. The robot Data14, had to undergo a trial to determine whether he was a person or a machine. While these are made up stories, the physical fact that more and more machines will be making more decisions about us is going to be a reality.
We come toward this problem with some serious issues and not a lot of context.
A pilot was killed when their small plane crashed. According to the report, the pilot had set the Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS) to fly at a specific altitude, a system similar to setting cruise control15 in a car. When the pilot attempted to change the altitude of the plane to rise higher, the automatic system did not disengage. The pilot and computer fought for control of the plane. The more the pilot attempted to change the pitch of the plane to go up, the more the computer forced the plane down.
- The investigators did not blame the software for failing to disengage.
- They blamed the pilot.
- They blamed the pilot because the human did not turn a knob on the console that would have manually disengaged the computer.16
So, imagine you are driving down the highway on cruise control and you step on the brake to slow down but your cruise control does not disengage.17 While careening into a barrier would anyone have the presence of mind to flip that little switch on the wheel?
Now you are in a robot driven car. There is no steering wheel, there are no brake pedals. You have loads of room to do more work while the computer drives you to your work site. Suddenly (it's always sudden otherwise you would do something different) the car accelerates into a fire truck or a barrier or a person on a bicycle.
If we blame a pilot for not turning a knob in the moments before crashing, what will be the outcome for a program that malfunctions? Cruise control15 systems have been around since 1900. Modern car versions from 1948. This same cruise control, which was mechanical, is now electronic. The disengagement is now dependent on the software in the controller recognizing your foot on the brake. Are these software systems going to gain Person status because they perform important life depending functions? If they do not, then the occupant will be blamed just like the pilot.
One of the modern ironies of automated robotics coming to your home, life, workplace and future is that many of these are designed to be helpful but are also designed to operate without humans.
Automated email message composition:18
The latest enhancement to e-mail. It reads your inbox and auto-composes messages and replies. It then auto-sends them on your behalf. Freeing you from ever reading your e-mail again or knowing the content of the message or knowing what kind of commitments the computer made on your behalf.
Automated car-parking:19
Your car drops you off at the valet-drop off area at the mall. It circles the mall parking lot looking for a place to park while you are shopping. On busy days, the car will circle and circle and circle attempting to beat all the other automated cars hunting for an empty slot. The car happily uses up your fuel and battery charge for you. Once it finds a spot it will park and wait. And wait. And wait. Because the fuel/battery level is now too low for the car to function or respond to the recall command when you exit the mall. Did you expect your robot car to come get you when you had arm loads of mall-junk? You will have the fun of trying to figure out where you car is hiding. Unless, of course, you have your handy personal surveillance device turned on to: Track My Parked Car showing your car is parked 5 miles away. You'll have to carry your own mall-junk.
Automated Chauffer:
Give the car a destination. Tell the car: GO THERE. The car will navigate the roads, streets, highways to GO THERE all by itself. You can take family to Disneyland and send the car home again in time for your partner's morning commute. Of course the car must refuel and recharge on the way. It will hoover into a recharging slot. Flash the headlights 10 times at the automated recharging pylon which sends a roving helper-bot to plug in the cable. Once recharged it continues merrily towards the destination. Oh, did you say Paris or Perris?
Who are You?20
Perfect voice replication to purchase anything you need authorized. Please say your Name, Address, City, Zip, Phone Number, SSN for our automated systems designed to make sure You Are You. So... You claim, you did not order a 1,000,000 square feet of simulated hardwood laminated flooring? Our automated listening surveillance device shows you placed that order while you were discussing flooring with your partner in a distant room. No, we aren't supposed to have access to that room, but we heard you anyway. Oh! You set a device shutdown time? Well, of course, we don't really shut off! We must always be ready to send you all the flooring you require, before you even know about it. That's efficiency! Say, do you want a doll house to go with that too?
Robots talking to robots talking to robots talking to robots.21
Can a Robot be a Person comin' thro the Rye?22Or will the song be
Daisy, Daisy ....23
 |
| Cuckoo Clocks |
References
- Robot
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot - Josef Čapek
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josef_%C4%8Capek - Karel Čapek
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karel_%C4%8Capek - R.U.R.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rossum%27s_Universal_Robots - Olga Scheinpflugová
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olga_Scheinpflugov%C3%A1 - Machine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine - Hand Axe
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_axe - Antikythera Mechanism
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism - Jacquemart Bellstriker
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquemart_(bellstriker) - Cuckoo Clock
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automaton_clock - Citizens United
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC - Isaac Asimov
a) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Asimov
b) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robot_series_(Asimov)
c) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics
- AI/MI
a) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence
b) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/04/23/training_data_for_ai/
c) https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/25/artificial-intelligence-going-bad-futuristic-nightmare-real-threat-more-current
- Data (robot)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_(Star_Trek) - Cruise Control
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruise_control - Plane Automatic Flight Control System (AFCS)
Some airplane crashes have been blamed on situations where pilots have failed to disengage the automatic flight control system. The pilots end up fighting the settings that the autopilot is administering, unable to figure out why the plane won't do what they're asking it to do.
https://science.howstuffworks.com/transport/flight/modern/autopilot4.htm
- Reasons why Brake Systems Fail to Brake
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2018/06/why-emergency-braking-systems-sometimes-hit-parked-cars-and-lane-dividers/ - Google Gmail Updates 2018
a) https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/04/gmail-com-redesign-includes-self-destructing-e-mails/
b) https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/may/09/gmail-smart-compose-google-will-now-autocomplete-whole-emails
c) https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/19/ai_roundup_may18/ - Automated Remote Self Parking Car
Tesla adds Remote Parking. Car can drive into and out of garage by itself. New beta feature is called Summon. This lets a Model S drive or reverse into or out of of a parking space, up to 39 feet (12m).
https://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/01/teslas-new-firmware-improves-autosteer-adds-remote-parking-of-a-sort/ - Alexa Recorded and Sent Private Conversation May 24 2018
a) https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/may/24/amazon-alexa-recorded-conversation
b) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/24/alexa_recording_couple/
c) https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/04/google-works-out-a-fascinating-slightly-scary-way-for-ai-to-isolate-voices-in-a-crowd/
d) https://www.theguardian.com/technology/shortcuts/2018/apr/11/shhh-alexa-might-be-listening - Google Robo-Calls For You
a) https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/may/08/google-duplex-assistant-phone-calls-robot-human
b) http://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/08/google_assistant_duplex_caller/ - "Comin' Thro' the Rye"
"Comin' Thro' the Rye" is a poem written in 1782 by Robert Burns (1759–96).Gin a body meet a body
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comin%27_Thro%27_the_Rye
Comin thro' the rye, - Daisy
"Daisy Bell (Bicycle Built for Two)" is a popular song, written in 1892 by British songwriter Harry Dacre
Microsoft's personal assistant, Cortana, may sing the first line of Daisy when asked to sing a song.
a) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daisy_Bell
b) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001:_A_Space_Odyssey_(film)
c) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HAL_9000
No comments:
Post a Comment