Law processor explains how to prevent a future robot uprising:Dylan Matthews: A lot of people would assume that criminal responsibility should lie with the manufacturer and owner of a robot, rather than with the robot himself (or herself).Gabriel Hallevy: Well, if we impose criminal responsibility on the robot itself, it does not mitigate liability on the part of the programmer or the manufacturer or the user.Dylan Matthews: So you’re adding liability to the robot, rather than shifting it from the manufacturer.Gabriel Hallevy: Yes. The criminal liability of a robot is additional to the current criminal liability. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/05/h...
what happens when your normally functioning unit is hijacked and re programmed? to commit a crime like rob a bank (if they have them in the future).?or........to hack other people's bank accounts and drain them....????or to kill your wife/husband in some strange hard to find way? t.
"Miss Scarlet in the library with a knife." sounds a lot more interesting than "the toaster in the bathroom with a moldy crust".Howie52even animate objects are not driven by the samemotivation as the individuals involved.
What if your robot is threatened by withholding of updates/scheduled maintenance? They might run amok "worrying" about it, let alone missing the maintenance.=asltro, remembering the heat applied to robot feet (and consequent yelling) in one of the Star Wars movies--was that Billy Dee's planet or Jabba the Hutt's?
What if your robot is threatened by withholding of updates/scheduled maintenance? They might run amok "worrying" about it, let alone missing the maintenance.I'd call him Marvin.Count No'Count
Sounds like a matter for the circuit courts.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |