Opinions held in the ethical debate surrounding the creation of artificial intelligence (AI) are while diverse as they are fiercely debated. Not only is there the issue of whether or not we'll become "playing god" by creating a true AI, but also the issue of how we install a set of human-friendly ethics within a sentient machine.
With humanity currently divided across numerous of different countries, religions and groups, the question of who gets to make the final call is a tricky one. It may well be still left to whichever country gets there first, and the dominating opinion within their federal government and scientific society. After that, we may just have to let it run and hope for the best.
Is the Birth of Artificial Intelligence Inevitable?
Each week, scores of academic papers are released from universities the world over staunchly defending the various opinions. One interesting aspect here is that it's broadly recognized that this event will happen within the next few decades. After all, in 2011 Caltech created the 1st artificial neural network in a test tube, the initial robot with "muscles" and "tendons" in now with us in the kind of Ecci, and huge leaps forwards are being made in just about every relevant scientific discipline.
It's seeing that exciting as it is incredible to consider that we may witness such an event. One paper by Nick Bostrom of Oxford University's philosophy section stated that "there seems currently to end up being no good surface for assigning a negligible probability to the hypothesis that super-cleverness will be created within the lifespan of some individuals alive today". This is a convoluted way of saying that the super-clever machines of sci-fi are a very probable upcoming reality.
Robotics and Machine Ethics
So, what ethics are in question here? Robotics looks at the rights of the devices that people create in the same way as our own individual rights. It's something of a reality check to consider what rights a sentient robot would have, such as freedom of speech and self-expression.
Machine ethics is slightly different and applies to computers and various other systems sometimes referred to as artificial moral agents (AMAs). A good example of this is in the military and the philosophical conundrum of where the responsibility would lie if somebody died in "friendly fire" from an artificially intelligent drone. How can you court-martial a machine?
In 1942, Isaac Asimov wrote a short history which defined his Three Laws of Robotics:
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow an individual to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Rules.
3. A robot must protect its own existence provided that such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws and regulations.
This cleverly-devised trio of behaviour-governing rules appears infallible, but how would they fare in real life? Asimov's series of stories on the subject hinted that no rules could adequately govern behaviour in an entirely failsafe way in all potential situations, and motivated the 2004 movie of the same name: "I, Robot".
Who Gets to Call the Pictures?
Other controversial areas of development such as for example bio technology also raise the question of whether we're trying to play God. These are difficult questions, but it appears almost inevitable that scientific progress will thoroughly push the boundaries over coming years. The potent combination of our endless curiosity and possible commercial applications will inevitably keep moving things forward.
So where does this place artificial intelligence technology? Definitely, the power potentially commanded by an artificial super-cleverness, the technology it could create, and the devastation it might wreak if it got out of control, puts it in a whole different ballpark to artificially creating algae to harness the energy of sunlight?
Japan is arguably the current entrance runner for robotics systems, and with a shrinking inhabitants comprised of an increasing percentage of elderly people in need of pensions and healthcare funded by limited numbers of working taxpayers, it seems unlikely that Japan will suddenly hold back due to the ethical debate.
As interesting since it is to consider the ethical implications of artificial intelligence, it's easy to overlook the fact that this is a global, human race issue rather than a country-specific issue. It's not like landing on the moon where countries can be pitted against one another in a space race scenario. But probably with the increasing effect of the Internet meshing us all jointly, some decisions will be made in the global fashion that they should have.
Comments