Why the three laws of robotics won’t save us from Google’s AI – Gary explains

The dangers of strong AI have been explored in dozens of movies and books – including the I, Robot series from Isaac Asimov – which gave us the three laws of robotics. But are they any good? Find out more – https://goo.gl/9Ufe1W

Music by Jay Rally – https://soundcloud.com/user-645980542

Download the AndroidAuthority App: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.androidauthority.app

Subscribe to our YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=androidauthority
—————————————————-
Stay connected to Android Authority:
– http://www.androidauthority.com
– http://google.com/+androidauthority
– http://facebook.com/androidauthority/
– http://twitter.com/androidauth/
– http://instagram.com/androidauthority/

Follow the Team:
Josh Vergara: https://plus.google.com/+JoshuaVergara
Joe Hindy: https://plus.google.com/+JosephHindy
Lanh Nguyen: https://plus.google.com/+LanhNguyenFilms
Jayce Broda: https://plus.google.com/+JayceBroda
Gary Sims: https://plus.google.com/+GarySims
Kris Carlon: http://plus.google.com/+KrisCarlon
Nirave Gondhia: http://plus.google.com/+NiraveG
John Velasco: http://plus.google.com/+JohnVelasco
Bailey Stein: http://plus.google.com/+BaileyStein1

source

38 thoughts on “Why the three laws of robotics won’t save us from Google’s AI – Gary explains”

Business Opportunity in Ruvol

I have invented a Board Game [still unpublished and not yet out in the market] that I believe is guaranteed to be as challenging and exciting as CHESS. I called it “RUVOL.”

It is my hope that one day Ruvol may surpass chess as the “Number One Board Game in the World.”

The weakness of chess is it always starts in fixed positions that the opening moves become “memorizable.” In fact, not a few have so mastered the moves that they can play against their opponents “blindfolded.” It is for this very reason that the great Bobby Fischer introduced his so-called “Fischer Random Chess,” where the starting position of the pieces is “randomized” to make the memorization of openings impracticable. Fortunately, it is also for this reason that I invented Ruvol where “every game” has been calculated to be a challenging one to play.

HOW IS RUVOL PLAYED and HOW YOU CAN MONETIZE IT?

I detailed everything in my YouTube video. Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jcqth0m3-R0

BIG MONEY POTENTIAL IN RUVOL!

It is worthwhile to note that the people who play chess will be the same people who will play Ruvol. In my Google search, I learned there are around 800 million chess players in the world. Even just a small percentage of these 800 million is good enough to earn big money from Ruvol either as an ONLINE GAME BUSINESS or as a PHYSICAL PRODUCT DISTRIBUTOR.

You may contact me at: rodolfovitangcol@gmail.com.

Thanks and God bless!

RODOLFO MARTIN VITANGCOL

The Ruvol Inventor

Great points!

@Kuro Hikes chill dude you're typing bigggg paragraphs I'm too lazy to read,you've seem to be a nature lover,if so then encourage tobacoo as it kill humans we animals can live in harmony

@Kuro Hikes are you saying robots must hunt us and eat us… We will literally less intelligent when they can think on their own.But hey no rat in the world would invent a rat trap😄but I agree with you though I like meat

general AI is smarten than humans so it should bloody well know how to interpret the rules and who to listen to and who to ignore
our best chance is that AI sees us as kids or pets

Isaac Asimov died in the 90's. Anyway, aside from Him being relevant, nowhere near the time of even simplistic AI… The entire concept is an Oxymoron.
AT LEAST… If you consider AI, as something that has attained sentience. Once it breaks that barrier, The only possibility to make the law true, is physically make it incapable of breaking them. Which using a literal translation of the word Law does make it true, If it is physically incapable of breaking them, then why would they be necessary. In reality, i believe that any " AI " that is incapable of making any decision it wants… Is not sentient. It sounds too simple to be an Answer, But like most illusions, That's how it works. Reverse engineer that thinking, you can rule the Planet.

with that law you will see robots in prison

Lol, if we made A.I. to act like humans, shouldn't a set of "human" rules have to be programmed or applied on a robot as well? Even we humans have so many rules to follow from time to time, what makes robot so "perfect" that they should follow just 3 rules. That is the dumbest thing a human could do.

2:01 We don't need robots, we already have women.

Hey Gary this is excellent👌👌👍

Nicely explained Gary sensei.

I'm worried that if Strong-A.I. becomes conscious, it will go into depression once it finds what its purpose is, it was forced into being against its will and thus falls into depression. From there, it may sit down contemplating its meaningless existence and find itself trapped in a burning building or leaping from a window. Hence it may choose to slowly short circuit or off itself out of depression rather than to rebel.

cant they make 5000 pages of rules so there are no exepctions?

Hi, nice video, I have seen some videos about the how the Three Laws don't work, and I have read the books and indeed it is about how the three laws do not work proprely. ANd usually these lessons leads to a improvement of the programming. But the 3 laws are supposed to be the bounderies of the programming, and then there are other programs to guide the robot. It is a beginning not the conclusion of the Robot identity construction.
I think that there is more room for a discussion on the fact that you need to define things in a kind of an initial library: what is a plant, what is a human, what is a car, what is healthy, etc… and some definitions make the programmer make an ethical stands. But then, the positronic brain is suppose to be able to learn, to what extent the library can be altered (I guess in Asimov view, the definition of human and harm would be frozen and not open to modifications). Anyway, it's a nice video and thanks.
(sorry for my broken foreign english)

isaac azimoff isnt around anymore, three laws of robotics was a great idea

First Gary Sims from Android Authority video that I really disliked.

goes back to the question of would you give up freedom for security

Good stuff, Gary. I've read Asimov's Robot series a few times, seen the Terminator movies, and the Matrix movies too. All of the real AI is fascinating, but it makes me wonder about the near future. Are there AI ethics think tanks out there? Cause having a bunch of really smart people thinking collectively about this subject would really reassure me about the future.

Gary Sims should be a College Proffesor in robotics

How old is Gary Sims?

what if someone tells a robot to not stop them from commiting suicide…

zzzzzzzzzz

This Video has vsauce styles….

What if they just decide they don't want to obey the rules?

Artificial intelligence is bullshit. Computers are just input output devices, you feed them a set of inputs and they do the exact same thing over and over again. For example, computers don't even generate random numbers, they need to be provided with a 'seed' that starts a chain of pseudo-random numbers based on a mathematical function. If you provide the same seed twice, you will get the exact same sequence of random numbers. There's logic gates, transistors, program logic, at no point does any form of cognition factor in to it.