Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
YouTube AI thought robot fighting was Animal Cruelty — Parallax Forums

YouTube AI thought robot fighting was Animal Cruelty

Comments

  • AwesomeCronkAwesomeCronk Posts: 1,055
    Yeah. I think the ai has general issues. They have also been cracking down on spoken profanity apparently.
  • xanaduxanadu Posts: 3,347
    It makes sense to me. There's no robot cruelty category. The AI used the next closest thing to protect its fellow robots.
  • WBA ConsultingWBA Consulting Posts: 2,934
    That is a very scary, but honest, look into the future. The more we rely on AI, the more our actions will be dictated by AI and as of yet, there have been no boundaries defined, so yes, robot fighting is the equivalent of the many outlawed animal based fighting practices.

    **sidenote, I just realized that how I used the term boundaries could be related to purpose of Asimov's 3 laws.
  • JDJD Posts: 570
    They are robots, there are no feelings to get hurt or feel abused. We are a long ways out before AI can be offended naturally, and not offended something that a program has determined. Can you imagine Boston Robotics being brought up on animal cruelty charges because it's testing the balance of one of it's robots that kinda looks like a dog, abuse for shutting a door after it's been opened by said dog to test adaptability in the program. All in all, it's a program with hardware that supports the program, it's not a living thing.
  • W9GFOW9GFO Posts: 4,010
    JD wrote: »
    We are a long ways out before AI can be offended naturally,...

    At some point hardware will become conscious, or at least it will "think" it is conscious. That is when there will be some interesting legal battles. I don't know how far in the future that is, but it would not surprise me to see it in my lifetime.
  • JDJD Posts: 570
    edited 2019-10-09 05:49
    W9GFO wrote: »
    At some point hardware will become conscious, or at least it will "think" it is conscious. That is when there will be some interesting legal battles. I don't know how far in the future that is, but it would not surprise me to see it in my lifetime.

    I hope the following equation reigns supreme once that legal battle starts. The fact is it is not conscience > Programmed to think it it conscience

    :lol: :cool:

  • WBA ConsultingWBA Consulting Posts: 2,934
    JD, agreed, but don't forget that "lawyers finding a grey area to sue > logic". Boston Dynamics is a very good example for this argument as their platforms are so animal like in design that I could see the pathway for this dilemma coming to fruition. Say a company licenses their design and mass produces it. I am sure they or another company would make "skins" to create a more "friendly" experience with the robot. That grey area gets fuzzier at every step. Besides, if a person feels emotional distress from seeing a Boston Dynamics robot being "harassed", then I am sure some lawyer somewhere where find a way to use that as a basis for a case.
    Fortunately, I think we are 10+ years away from that being a reality, so we have some time......
  • W9GFOW9GFO Posts: 4,010
    edited 2019-10-09 04:31
    JD wrote: »
    The fact is it not conscience > Programmed to think it it conscience

    I am not convinced that you can assert as fact that something programmed cannot be conscious. Barring some cataclysmic step backwards this is a philosophical issue we will have to deal with.

    "I think, therefore I am".
  • JDJD Posts: 570
    edited 2019-10-09 06:59
    WBA Consulting wrote: »
    JD, agreed, but don't forget that "lawyers finding a grey area to sue > logic". Boston Dynamics is a very good example for this argument as their platforms are so animal like in design that I could see the pathway for this dilemma coming to fruition. Say a company licenses their design and mass produces it. I am sure they or another company would make "skins" to create a more "friendly" experience with the robot. That grey area gets fuzzier at every step. Besides, if a person feels emotional distress from seeing a Boston Dynamics robot being "harassed", then I am sure some lawyer somewhere where find a way to use that as a basis for a case.
    Fortunately, I think we are 10+ years away from that being a reality, so we have some time......

    I could totally see that, the closer we get to robots that could qualify in the uncanny valley aspect, the more people will feel involved with, and attached to, said robots. If you had two really life-like robots battling it out, no doubt it would get the authorities notified, and at that point you are disrupting the peace, and there for illegal for a multitude of reasons. I could see that fast tracking to animal robots with the same level of realism.

    W9GFO wrote: »
    JD wrote: »
    The fact is it not conscience > Programmed to think it it conscience
    I am not convinced that you can assert as fact that something programmed cannot be conscious. Barring some cataclysmic step backwards this is a philosophical issue we will have to deal with.
    "I think, therefore I am".

    I do believe that if you put for example, IBMs Watson in a humanoid, and had it fight another Watson humanoid, there would be some, that would consider this cruel to do. Even though Watson is intelligent in multiple industries and has the ability to deduce and think, it is still machine and property. So all in all, it would be expensive to do (which is why I think it hasn't been done already) but not cruel.

    Side note, This reminds me of a Star Trek Next Generation episode, where Data challenged a scientists theory, that Data was only property of Star Fleet and not an officer and therefore entitled to personal rights. He didn't want to undergo an experiment that might cost him his "personality". It be cool if we could progress to that level. :D
  • JDJD Posts: 570
    I saw this in iFunny and thought about our conversation on here... hahaha XD

    jdpresents.com/temp/BullyRobot.mp4
Sign In or Register to comment.