• GeneralEmergency@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    1 day ago

    If you’ve ever actually read any of the books you’d know that using these laws as actual laws is a dumb move. The paradoxes caused by them are a pretty central theme.

    • leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Yeah, the actual purpose of the laws was to produce interesting (when involving Susan Calvin) or amusing (when involving Powell and Donovan) stories.

      Still some form of protection for humans is needed.

      If a robot (or any other corporate product or activity) causes injury everyone in the corporate chain of responsibility (especially board members and stockholders) should be criminally liable.

    • Fredselfish@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yeah like one of the stories in i Robot, the people were going die because the robot couldn’t break one of the three rules and went haywire. Think that was the issue in most of the stories.

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 day ago

        Latter stories had Daneel Olivaw lawyering his way around the laws. Then there was a schism where some robots thought he misinterpreted them, went too far. Then the Zeroeth law came around adding more twists.

        It’s been 20-years since I read all that. Tell me if I’m wrong.