The Laws of Robotics are mentioned sometimes. But are they really realistic? They were created in a work of FICTION, yes FICTION in order to provide in a narrative in a story about how they are not followed.
Quote:
First Law
A robot may not harm a human or through inaction allow harm to come to a human.
The first law is the law that is impressed into the positronic brain the firmest, and overrides both of the other laws.
So how would you realistically program this into a robot? Can it see the future. Which humans? Which actions? Which humans will be harmed if it does not act?
Will we program a robot to perform CPR? How long does a person have to be dead for for CPR not to be carried out (the robot revolution of robots digging up corpses to perform CPR, yeahhhhh). How do you even put this into a computable algprithm and code it. Do people who believe this garbage even know what a computable algorithm is?
Quote:
Second Law
A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
Potentially any action could harm a human. Dense idea.
Quote:
Third Law
A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
What if a robot uses resources that could be used by a human. Humans will die.
My conclusion is the laws of robotics are cool in a story to provide a narrative, but in reality they are not computable.