If there were only three laws, which should they be?
If there were only three laws, which should they be?
If there were only three laws, which should they be?
Always ask about the little red button on the bottom of the gun.
Can’t forget rule 4!
Really shitty deal for any self aware robot.
My headcanon for The Matrix's "humans are batteries" is that it's the machines' perverse interpretation of this --- killing the humans is off the table, and for whatever reason letting them live with no purpose to serve the machines is also disallowed. But giving their lives "meaning" in the form of a shitty (and thermodynamically dubious) "battery" somehow satisfies the rules.
It's a very big stretch, I'll admit...
Except they kill humans all the time.
I think it's just easier to accept that there is an unexplained reason why humans can generate some kind of power that's useful to the machines for something at some point between the winning of the war at the point of the movies.
Just ignore the fourth movie.
Yeah, Can't wait to witness their strike for independence
LOL the banners, fingers crossed i'm alive to read them.
History reincarnated
Stage is set
Cause no harm to another human unless it be in defense of self or others.
Clean up after yourself when outside of your home.
Don't be a dick.
Act to honour and recognize all humans as human. This is Said's Law.
Act to sustain human security. This is Cura's Law.
Act to accept responsibility for each action, especially where it guides future actions. This is Sartre's Law.
Yeah, but then there's a disagreement over if not mowing your lawn is being a dick or just a personal preference, and it all goes to shit really fast.
DO YOU WANT TO REINVENT THE CONCEPT OF A GOVERNMENT FROM SCRATCH? BECAUSE THAT'S HOW YOU REINVENT THE CONCEPT OF A GOVERNMENT FROM SCRATCH!
This is my life now!
•Try not to be a dick
•No means no
•An additional elusive third thing. I'm a big fan of the laws of thermodynamics. Maybe those.
I am going to take this as if you mean universal laws that cannot be violated and not laws imposed by a state. These are 3 rules that I think if everyone followed would lead to a world better than the current one.
You can probably trim that down by one.
But I would also add:
This feeds back into the first point.
Omg, it's Taako from TV
good luck defining where facts end and beliefs begin. ultimately science is a belief, even if it is evidence-based
Science is not a belief, nor is it a fact. It's a set of tools for building knowledge by methodically separating models that work from models that don't. Facts can certainly fall out of scientific work, but it's a mistake to pick up any scientific work and label it "Fact". It's a constant work in progress.
Facts aren't that difficult to define, the real problem is finding universally accepted sources to communicate facts. None of us are going to be able to critically examine every single claim made by every single scientific theory, journalist, blogger, podcast host, ChatGPT instance, preacher, prophet, etc. And did that politician mean to say the words that came out of their mouth, or did they actually misspeak and their real intention was something else?
Live a full life without impacting others negatively, including those yet to exist.
Try create something that wasn’t here before that has some positive impact to your peers. Read peers: all life.
There is no dominion beyond these words.
including those yet to exist.
That, believe it or not, is jail.
Sex Drugs Rock and roll
I just talking with your mum and she agrees that third one is really silly
Basically some sort of democratic case law
A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
A robot must obey 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 Law.
There's a sweet monologue by George Carlin about the ten commandments.
I can't find it quickly right now but he reduces them to three.
No, Carlin wasn't religious but I love that monologue and it fits right in here.
UPDATE: https://youtu.be/CE8ooMBIyC8
Do to others as you would have done to you
Do to others as they would do to others
Nothing should be forbidden if it harms no one
I think harm needs to be clearly defined.
1st and 2nd contradict.
Say, 2nd, if someone harms others, then I should harm him/her, right?
But then, 1st, I wouldn't wanna harm myself, so...
LIMBO
treat someone the way you would want to be treated; if that person is a rabid idiot that spews things like "death penalty now" , then make an exception since they don't deserve good treatement; they deserve what they would do to other people, it's ok to make an exception for these people.
No violence
No stealing
No billionaires
with the first two laws you wouldn't need the third
Possibly. But some people really need it spelled out.
Robot laws innit
be excellent to each other
party on dudes
pay me, specifically me, tribute in gold and silver on the last day of every month
Respect life, respect property, get consent.
Basically, people are people and deserve to be treated with equity. Any person is their own property, as is everything they own. If you want to physically interact with anyone’s property, get consent first.
I guess I won't be paying my taxes then.
Idgi
E: oh, no threat of violence?
A robot can not harm nor, through inaction, allow harm to come to a human
A robot must obey unless it counters rule one
A robot must protect itself unless it counters rule 1 or 2
No Murder.
No Rape.
No Pollution.
(This would allow harm taxes, fines, prisons, mind altering, and just war against those breaking this law. The best compromises can be found by parallel experimentation.)
(This would allow forestry, agriculture, and livestock breeding/genetic engineering, but not intensive animal farming or hunting. Only animals died from natural causes could be eaten. The “natural causes” would then be engineered to minimise suffering and to metastabilise the ecosystem wisely, possibly adding mercifully killing hunters to control animal populations, and in the case of “intelligent” beings failing to control their reproduction, chances for them to risk their own life to gain freedom from static storage or death, with optional mind transmit for the mostly harmless, hoping that someone somewhere runs them on a computer.)
From my much longer answer to https://www.quora.com/If-you-were-to-come-up-with-three-new-laws-of-robotics-what-would-they-be/answers/23692757
There is porn about it. No exceptions.
The exception to rule 1 is the citation of rule 1.
There are no girls on the internet.
no bombing no smoking no petting