Original Three Laws of Robotics
Asimov's original suggested laws were devised to protect humans from interactions with robots. They are:
A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm
A robot must obey the 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 Laws
1) No robot should ever closely resemble a human, definitive and strongly contrasting machine:human differences must always be maintained. Definition of 'Robot' will need need ongoing clarification.
robot names and/or brands should always be in plain lower case,
for signage and in print, plus emergency contact details, and actual
physical appearances should plainly denote robotic manufacture.
robots should have minimalist design,
being uncustomised, non-anthrpomorphised, with make, model, purpose,
etc., clearly displayed, lower case, with plain letters and numbers.
robot should have the potential to engender emotional attachment from
No robot should have a human voice, the universal exception being
the 'Hawking Monotone'.
All human originated-programing, especially relating to autonomy,
must be carefully controlled, and, also differentiated from
machine-initiated autonomy and decision-making, this must also be
robots should have a set of easily struck BRBs,
Big Red Buttons,
that can be struck for instant shutdown, also, electronic versions
that can be used in a emergency, including by wifi, and most
importantly, for terminating any remotely generated and reticulated
robotic power source.
intelligence types and scope must be clearly defined and stated,
ie 'truth in labelling', plus, checked regularly for functional
fitness, and suitability for purpose, as well as for unwarranted or
illegal customisations. Humans
any with AI enhancement
should be easily identifiable, and tattooed and/or microchipped
robot should have 24/7 unmonitored 'Internet of Things'-like
any connectivity is to be restricted to properly-screened, and
necessary, product updates. Big Brother surveillance now re-focusses
on robots, their manufacturers, sales, and, any illegal
human-originated customisation and/or utilisation.
must be programmed only to destroy similar robots, if Asimov's
is to be met....the Geneva Convention must be thus enlarged.
Robot-initiated human casualty, or mortality, is thus a potential
war crime for both robot-makers and deployers, as well as when
resulting from any human-directed war tactics involving robots. Only
humans may have direct responsibility for killing other humans.
civilian human deaths caused by robots,
even inadvertent, is to be regarded as the direct responsibilty of
original makers, regardless of customisation, and, penalties, plus
redress, shared by any unlawful customizers. This is to make robots
more tamper-proof. Thus, Open Source v Proprietary manufacture
liabilities will need clarification, and, all
standards re robotic uses and deployment will need ongoing review.