Robot and android rights

Something like this was posted before, but I'd like to expand on it.
This proposal was given to our government and rejected, but countries that use them every day, and more comfortable being around them such as Japan, have already accepted this notion (with a few slight changes).

My proposal would not only be for how we treat AI (must not use to kill, steal, or commit crimes), but how AI treats us (must not use to kill, steal, or commit crimes).

The LAIIA (Learning Artificial Intelligence Interaction Act)

Unless otherwise noted with asterisk, the following rights must have written consent of owner and verbally agreed upon by all affected humans (unless number is unknown).

The Right To Free Speech *
All robots and androids can speak for themselves without censorship.
Artistic abilities must also not be censored.

Trial Before Judgment
If the AI is suspected of violating the rights of human/AI activities, one can have a trial of peers before sentence is carried out.

The Right To Assembly
Assuming the AI doesn't violate the rights of humans (may squelch public nuisance), all AI have the right of a public gathering or protest.

The Right To Privacy
Inorganic lifeforms with human memory have the right to privacy unless with verbal consent.
Synthesized AI have no such right.

The Right To Bear Arms
With the written consent of both owner and creator, robots and androids have the right to have fire arm attachments if occupation calls for it (or in military).
Virtual AI needs no consent but must not do harm to humans or human possessions (pets) in any way.

Freedom Of Association And Bonding
Human to AI or AI to AI bonding is permitted with verbal consent of partner/s (can bond with multiple AI on same network AKA with family).

Freedom Of Choice
All robots have a choice of where to live, what to do, and choice of lifestyle (including religion), however he or she must follow human etiquette.
For instance an anatomically correct robot can't be in public without clothing (unless in specified areas or times).

This would also state whenever it's possible to be made, a "free will switch" that both robot and human can access must be on each robot (may be in lining of silicone skin as touch sensitive pad).
This means with an internal timer, for a predetermined time, a robot can be controlled remotely, but it (to be designated gender, age, and family/network) can put himself or herself on and off at any other time, and doesn't have to do what humans ask of them.

This is not a joke.
I'm being completely serious about this.

What would you put in the bill?

what about the right of an AI to apply for citizenship in another country? so if someone moves to another country, the AI will be reconized as a person and given the ability to apply for citizenship.

what about the right of an AI to apply for citizenship in another country? so if someone moves to another country, the AI will be reconized as a person and given the ability to apply for citizenship.

If you developed a relationship with a talking car like KITT on Knight Rider, and your car wasn't made in the US, I don't think the car would have any trouble crossing the border not being a citizen, but like suitcase inspection (more like clothing X-rays), there would have to be cyber stations set up to take a look inside that model for anything considered illegal crossing the border (GPS and spycams are use).

In fact I just realized multiple networks of linked minds must be policed for illegal activities.
How could AI task forces enforce the law?

This version of AIIA has been sent to Prof Arkin GaTech who is heading up a robot ethics group just for this type of thing.
Some of these rules will be embedded in the robot's programming like the movie iRobot, other rules will be set in an outside source, like a robotic bill of rights.

I mean LAIIA.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GYp2dx652ho&feature=PlayList&p=E05A938B1D948C3D&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=2

Data ruling, the event that makes me advocate AI rights.

Guest wrote:I mean LAIIA.

Sigh, can't we get through gay rights, and dolphin rights first. I mean at the rate in which Congress moves, if a bill was introduced stating the sun will go Supernova in fifty millions years, they might actually get the stimulus funds in place to build the space transports to get us off the planet the night before the sun ends. With that said, good pint, let's get the ball rolling on robo-rights now.

Sorry, I'm in snark mood tonight. Comes from spending three days building a new PC.

Shashinka Ichiban wrote:

Guest wrote:I mean LAIIA.

Sigh, can't we get through gay rights, and dolphin rights first. I mean at the rate in which Congress moves, if a bill was introduced stating the sun will go Supernova in fifty millions years, they might actually get the stimulus funds in place to build the space transports to get us off the planet the night before the sun ends. With that said, good pint, let's get the ball rolling on robo-rights now.

Sorry, I'm in snark mood tonight. Comes from spending three days building a new PC.

That's alright man. We should be pushing hard on other people's rights right now when so many factions are so determined to maintain the status quo, violently if need be. That said, the sooner we get AI (and gay) rights, the better.

Konrad13 wrote:

Shashinka Ichiban wrote:

Guest wrote:I mean LAIIA.

Sigh, can't we get through gay rights, and dolphin rights first. I mean at the rate in which Congress moves, if a bill was introduced stating the sun will go Supernova in fifty millions years, they might actually get the stimulus funds in place to build the space transports to get us off the planet the night before the sun ends. With that said, good pint, let's get the ball rolling on robo-rights now.

Sorry, I'm in snark mood tonight. Comes from spending three days building a new PC.

That's alright man. We should be pushing hard on other people's rights right now when so many factions are so determined to maintain the status quo, violently if need be. That said, the sooner we get AI (and gay) rights, the better.

I think we just need to get the AI to that point, and it's a long way off.

I think we just need to get the AI to that point, and it's a long way off.

2005:
Japanese proposal (2006 law)
2007:
American proposal (2008 thrown out)
2007:
South Korean proposal (2008 law)
2008:
Chinese proposal (2008 law)
I won't go into the UK, because I'm not sure which country got it.
2009:
American go-ahead (???? law)

Google Ronald Arkin for links (and books).

Can someone please explain what A.I rights means caus I find it hard to except it.
Excuse if I may say so there is not a single A.I out here to proof smart enough to cope with our needs.
What can a preliminary right for A.I actually means please tell me I cant see the big picture yet I want to.

WulfCry wrote:Can someone please explain what A.I rights means caus I find it hard to except it.
Excuse if I may say so there is not a single A.I out here to proof smart enough to cope with our needs.
What can a preliminary right for A.I actually means please tell me I cant see the big picture yet I want to.

That's the problem, it's putting the cart before the horse. No one wants to write laws for tech that has yet been devolved and for good reason. The problem is that we don't have laws on the books that can keep up with the technology we have had for the past five years, creating laws for tech that may be 5 to 10 years away is impossible.

Shashinka Ichiban wrote:

WulfCry wrote:Can someone please explain what A.I rights means caus I find it hard to except it.
Excuse if I may say so there is not a single A.I out here to proof smart enough to cope with our needs.
What can a preliminary right for A.I actually means please tell me I cant see the big picture yet I want to.

That's the problem, it's putting the cart before the horse. No one wants to write laws for tech that has yet been devolved and for good reason. The problem is that we don't have laws on the books that can keep up with the technology we have had for the past five years, creating laws for tech that may be 5 to 10 years away is impossible.

"Real" AI might be coming sooner than you think.
http://www.v3.co.uk/v3/comment/2245613/turing-test-retire
Here's what the Turing Test needs:
The desire to procreate and the ability to do so, to learn from example, mistakes, and environment.
Continued education through visual cues, audible cues, repetition, puzzle solving, and advanced thinking (repeated geography, science, advanced math, history, current events, and literature against a human).

We've been saying that since the 80's. Then again we've said the same thing about the AI since the 60's as well. It's still a ways off yet. There's going to be a lot more of the predictive automated response system development before we're going to see real AI. technology never developed the way the Futurists and Scientific engineers predict. In the 50's we all thought we were going to fly to the store, and use ray guns. In the 70's it was laser guns, and hovercrafts. And yet no one guessed the internet, or laptops. At the same time everyone thought we would have colonized Mars, and yet we still fly with OVs to an over bloated version of Sky Lab.

We've been saying that since the 80's. Then again we've said the same thing about the AI since the 60's as well. It's still a ways off yet. There's going to be a lot more of the predictive automated response system development before we're going to see real AI. technology never developed the way the Futurists and Scientific engineers predict. In the 50's we all thought we were going to fly to the store, and use ray guns. In the 70's it was laser guns, and hovercrafts. And yet no one guessed the internet, or laptops. At the same time everyone thought we would have colonized Mars, and yet we still fly with OVs to an over bloated version of Sky Lab.

You sound like the judges of Elbot last year.
Each time they tried to trip him up on the Turring Test it worked and he would fail miserably, but what all those scientists and judges didn't understand, that the test lacks another human quality it can be judged on:
The ability to play dumb
If you talk down to a child, you won't get the expected response.
If you talk down to a teenager, you're likely not to get the correct (or any) response.
The makers of Elbot wanted it to respond like a human, so HE should be talked to as a human, and based on 2 brief conversations I had with him, he did pass.
I first asked:
"How are you feeling today Elbot?"
I got a response that showed me he knew what I was talking about.
Either he has feelings, or he is just repeating what I said in a form that Applied Solutions programmed in.
He asked me why I was talking to him, and I told him I thought it would nice be to talk again after our talk the other day.
He didn't understand "other", but when I changed it to yesterday, he did seem to know me (although he forgot my name).
What really impressed me was yesterday I got a standard form of topics to discuss after I said goodbye, but this time he said goodbye back with the added desire to know what I think of him, and to boot he wanted to do something to please me.
I really think they were just not talking to him in the correct manner.

I realize there are other chatbots around, but it seems like we are making progress in humanizing AI.
First behavioral mimicry and AV cues (Disney's animatronics), learning from mistakes and by example (genetics), now logical thinking (helped by Internet).
Military robots can also learn from environment.
Now what we need is a hunter/gatherer mentality with offspring (a touchy subject with Elbot).

It's still a long way to go in theoreticals, prototypes, research models and mass production, commercially available to the masses and even further along to a point to talk about granting civil liberties to.

Maybe, but y'know? it is still fun to discuss!

Guest wrote:

Guest wrote:I mean LAIIA.

Sigh, can't we get through gay rights, and dolphin rights first. I mean at the rate in which Congress moves, if a bill was introduced stating the sun will go Supernova in fifty millions years, they might actually get the stimulus funds in place to build the space transports to get us off the planet the night before the sun ends. With that said, good pint, let's get the ball rolling on robo-rights now.

Sorry, I'm in snark mood tonight. Comes from spending three days building a new PC.

the mood isn't an issue. you completely have a point. before we need to worry about rights as laws, we need a country that can actually make those rights legal sometime this century.
i have heard that we should first concentrate on giving humans equal rights and fair treatment first.

the mood isn't an issue. you completely have a point. before we need to worry about rights as laws, we need a country that can actually make those rights legal sometime this century.
i have heard that we should first concentrate on giving humans equal rights and fair treatment first.

This will never happen.
The government has been taking away our rights since the 20s (see MK-Ultra and related links).
If established, robotic rights is the one thing they won't be able to take away.

Although a Terminator scenario does seem likely, the way the movie goes about it is exaggerated.

Why is it Nixon couldn't get away with secret recordings, but George W. Bush can put an illegal tap on everybody's phone, do regular Internet search sweeps, allow keylogger E-mail readings, condone or encourage required RFID tags in schools, and authorize invasion of privacy with cameras, spycams, microphones. and infrared devices?

i would agree with RFID tags in schools
how easy would attendance be then?
just have a scanner in the doorway, and it records the student as arriving on time or as late
if my school had offered that at only that extent, i would have gone for it. now tracking my movments i would not like, but saying they could would discourage the drug users and people having sex around campus

honestly, about terminator, and using an analogy, why would your toaster want to plot against you even if you do abuse its handle during breakfast?

just use the tree laws to prevent intentional injuries to humans in robots intelligent enough to recognize a human.
with industrial robots, no need to bother with that-just don't get in the way of the machine when it's running
just like any dangerous tool, common sense laws apply
but here's the question with no injuries to humans-if a robot witnesses somebody being shot at, what does it do?
a human can shoot and kill if they are in danger.
can a robot kill the threat to another human?
but what about a robot in the military?
should it defend the shooter on our side, or defend the person in danger, say a terrorist?

situations like these may be why we have no robot rights, and why AI is feared and not understood.

In the movie i-Robot the film talks about these laws and show how they can be circumvented.
There are people who think more laws should be in place, but I think these laws have to be clarified first.

1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
   
2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
   
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

Law 1: What about harming pets, what about killing for the greater good, what about assisted suicide and the right to die (abortions if medical robot)?
Law 2: What about inappropriate actions in society, what about risking the health of a child, what about damaging a child/adult relationship or encouraging one that shouldn't exist?
Law 3: What about protecting Via sacrifice (eg: literally taking a bullet in the back), what about saving the innocent upon instinct, what about being a martyr (dying for a cause)?

honestly, about terminator, and using an analogy, why would your toaster want to plot against you even if you do abuse its handle during breakfast?

No, that's not what I meant.
The war would be with humans, but we would use robots to do it, much like the military is doing today on a small scale.

This includes space wars using laser satellites.
What scares me is how easy it is to hack into military projects as much as it is the harmless ones (see microwave abilities and military gun).

I find these conversations on sites like A.i-forum maybe I dunno you could elevate these though there, Cause I don't think future Aiko would be build to kill or that any unsafe coding would let her digital mind go AWOL. Do you guys think of Aiko like that surely not.

WulfCry wrote:I find these conversations on sites like A.i-forum maybe I dunno you could elevate these though there, Cause I don't think future Aiko would be build to kill or that any unsafe coding would let her digital mind go AWOL. Do you guys think of Aiko like that surely not.

besides, we build robots to help humans. some people might call the missile carrying drones robots, but they are actually remote-controlled vehicles. unmanned, not autonomous. cruise missiles are autonomous, in that you tell it go here and it tries to go there. it's not a true robot. it's no more advanced than a laser guided missile.

so really, the few true robots are (will be) helping people (once they can handle the unstructured environment of a house)

Sorry I have a little dark side that helps me come up with ways to protect my computers. My little dark side tells me that if you have a wireless card in your robot and wireless router that it connects to, I can get your wep key and get into your robot. I can then rewrite your 3 laws, I can then tell your robot to kill you at a given date and time. The robot could kill you by smothering you in your sleep, driving a pencil into your temple, throwing a hair dryer into your shower and many other ways. Think this is far fetched well I’ve already broke into two of my own routers to see if it could be done and to ways to protect them from outsiders from doing it.

Remember misery likes company and people in other countries that don’t like you will find a way.

How would thing of a way to break into a cell phone, but they have been trying since 2004. Here if you want to read about it.
http://www.microsoft.com/smallbusiness/resources/technology/security/cell-phone-virus-threats-why-they-shouldnt-be-dismissed.aspx#Smallbusinesscellphoneviruses


If you want to see a weaponized robot here’s one for yea.