Post #4011563

Asimov's point was never “three neat rules solve robotics.” It was: if you create non-human agents with physical or social power, the central design problem is preventing harmt o humans. We’ve largely inverted that. We’re asking how to make them more useful, faster, cheaper, more deployable, more deniable, and only then asking how much harm is politically acceptable. That toot is really a masterful statement of that. Asimov's laws were never perfect (they were a narrative device primarily so were never intended to be) but AT LEAST THEY TRIED. We've just skipped to - hey they're great at killin'! with nary a pause... https://mastodon.online/@nikitonsky/116959863208909813