A.I Threat or not

In 2011, the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) of United Kingdom jointly published a set of five ethical "principles for designers, builders and users of robots" in the real world, along with seven "high-level messages" intended to be conveyed, based on a September 2010 research workshop:

  1. Robots should not be designed solely or primarily to kill or harm humans.
  2. Humans, not robots, are responsible agents. Robots are tools designed to achieve human goals.
  3. Robots should be designed in ways that assure their safety and security.
  4. Robots are artifacts; they should not be designed to exploit vulnerable users by evoking an emotional response or dependency. It should always be possible to tell a robot from a human.
  5. It should always be possible to find out who is legally responsible for a robot.
The messages intended to be conveyed were:

  1. We believe robots have the potential to provide immense positive impact to society. We want to encourage responsible robot research.
  2. Bad practice hurts us all.
  3. Addressing obvious public concerns will help us all make progress.
  4. It is important to demonstrate that we, as roboticists, are committed to the best possible standards of practice.
  5. To understand the context and consequences of our research, we should work with experts from other disciplines, including: social sciences, law, philosophy and the arts.
  6. We should consider the ethics of transparency: are there limits to what should be openly available?
  7. When we see erroneous accounts in the press, we commit to take the time to contact the reporting journalists.

This would be ideal for a world where artificial general intelligence, or even artificial superintelligence, (AGI & ASI) co-exist w/ humanity.
 
Noah_A_S said:
In 2011, the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) and the Arts and Humanities Research Council (AHRC) of United Kingdom jointly published a set of five ethical "principles for designers, builders and users of robots" in the real world, along with seven "high-level messages" intended to be conveyed, based on a September 2010 research workshop:

  1. Robots should not be designed solely or primarily to kill or harm humans.
  2. Humans, not robots, are responsible agents. Robots are tools designed to achieve human goals.
  3. Robots should be designed in ways that assure their safety and security.
  4. Robots are artifacts; they should not be designed to exploit vulnerable users by evoking an emotional response or dependency. It should always be possible to tell a robot from a human.
  5. It should always be possible to find out who is legally responsible for a robot.
The messages intended to be conveyed were:

  1. We believe robots have the potential to provide immense positive impact to society. We want to encourage responsible robot research.
  2. Bad practice hurts us all.
  3. Addressing obvious public concerns will help us all make progress.
  4. It is important to demonstrate that we, as roboticists, are committed to the best possible standards of practice.
  5. To understand the context and consequences of our research, we should work with experts from other disciplines, including: social sciences, law, philosophy and the arts.
  6. We should consider the ethics of transparency: are there limits to what should be openly available?
  7. When we see erroneous accounts in the press, we commit to take the time to contact the reporting journalists.

This would be ideal for a world where artificial general intelligence, or even artificial superintelligence, (AGI & ASI) co-exist w/ humanity.
Click to expand...
I would tend to agree on the 12 points. The problem is that the mad scientist in me had counter agruments to each point... that I should probably keep quiet about.

Maybe point #13 could be that good robots police bad robots so that humans don't get hurt.
 
MODAT7 said:
I would tend to agree on the 12 points. The problem is that the mad scientist in me had counter agruments to each point... that I should probably keep quiet about.

Maybe point #13 could be that good robots police bad robots so that humans don't get hurt.
Click to expand...

This made me think of one of my favourite sci-fi movies.


An AI military murder-bot loses its program and becomes self aware.
 

Top