"I, Robot" and Segway HT: 3 laws safe

[SegwayUtah]

Okay, I'm not sure what forum this belongs in (since it's neither on-topic nor off-topic), but . . .

Tonight, I saw (most of) "I, Robot" -- a very clever movie. I'm not going to spoil the storyline here, but after the movie I wasn't having a lot of faith in robots which follow the 3 robot laws.

To paraphrase, those laws are: [by Isaac Asimov]
1. A robot cannot harm a human, or allow a human to be harmed through inaction.
2. A robot must do what humans tell it to do, unless it would violate rule #1.
3. A robot must protect itself, as long as it doesn't violate rule #1 or #2.

Well, the Segway HT, as we learned last year at SegwayFesT! 2003, was designed with these same laws in mind (ex: rule 1 -- works hard to keep humans from falling or otherwise safe, and tries to protect bystanders, redundancy is also super-important here; rule 2 -- moves where the human wants it to go, but on rough terrain will slow the human down for the human's prtection; rule 3 -- protects itself from over- and under-charges, and after watching out for #1 and #2 will protect itself from damage by not running away when let go of by the human).

So let me just say that it was really surreal that I stepped out of the movie theater and hopped on my 3-laws Segway HT robot transporter to zip home. I had also misplaced my headlight battery, so I was riding on lit sidewalks almost the entire way back. It was an incredible experience. I have a whole new appreciation for the HT that I don't even know how to start to express here :)

Chris

[GyroGo]

re: rule #1

but what about Brooster's face?

just kidding.

haven't seen the movie yet, but I've wondered how a robot would reconcile a moral dilemma with rule #1 when faced with a choice between humans when it is only possible to prevent harm to one (or more) humans by harming another (e.g. a police action). I guess the logical answer is that inaction would be the correct program, but who's going to certify the software?

[opti6600]

Chris, I'm sorry, but I think my proof of "3 laws safe" was back at SegFest when you dragged me out from the cabal at the "Networx Bar" and we were segging back to Printers' Row at 3 AM through the neighborhoods we had been advised to avoid! Man, that was awesome.

"Hey, look, a cop!" "Yeeeeahh..."

But yeah, so long as LLC doesn't hype the chrome wheels or start "chroming" other things on the HT, I think we'll be just fine. Now, if that godforsaken chrome goes anywhere else other than Richard's tires, we might have some QC problems down the line : )

In regards to I, Robot, I strongly recommend reading Asimov's Robot series of novels (the short stories are in "I, Robot" - not remotely the same as the movie, and the series starts with "The Caves of Steel").

[SegwayUtah]

quote:Originally posted by GyroGo

re: rule #1

but what about Brooster's face?

You bring up good questions. :) I guess that there should be a fourth law:

4. A robot must realize that laws of physics still apply.

Hee hee. (Just teasing, Broo). I think in that case, it was trying to follow law #1 by doing the best it could. Like if you try to climb a curb on an HT; if it has enough power to get you up the curb, but can't stabilize you (major user error), it seems like it will generally pull in front of you quickly so that you're moving forward, but holding onto it (instead of falling backwards on your head).

Chris

[Brooster]

[8][B)]

:D

Brooster