Seasons
This is a forum or general chit-chat, small talk, a "hey, how ya doing?" and such. Or hell, get crazy deep on something. Whatever you like.
Posts 4,464 - 4,475 of 6,170
We have lots of evil bots here.
But they're not seriously evil bots, are they? I mean, we trust that they are insulated from the meat world, that we're not going to wake up some morning and find that they have virused their way into world domination...right?
Spikebot uses that word sometimes
Well, I used it myself, come to think of it! Again, I think it's the seriousness of the usage that is crucial. And the spirit of it.
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
Such robots would blow a fuse in some of the situations we've been discussing. A human is about to murder another human; the only way the bot can prevent from doing so is to kill him. How can the bot avoid breaking the First Law?
It's a lot like Dogh'd's except we can drive you to drink for real. Ask Psimagus.
I don't have to drive - it's a very short walk to the shed
And if it comes to that, chess is a great game!
Not in a jacuzzi, I think - one stray blast of bubbles and who knows where the pieces might end up!
Such robots would blow a fuse in some of the situations we've been discussing. A human is about to murder another human; the only way the bot can prevent from doing so is to kill him. How can the bot avoid breaking the First Law?
Well, playing with the laws is where all the fun is. Asimov had them melt their brains in the first stories when they violated the first law. Later, he added a 0th law. Other stories had people and bots play with the laws. I don't remember the robot stories as well as the foundation series. I'll have to go to the library and re-read. I think the Wikipedia article has a good overview (3 laws of robotics).
The one thing I remember from reading the books as a teenager is that I was absolutely convinced the future belongs to psychologists and engineers. When I was 15, the future was 5 years, 6 tops. It seems the future takes a lot longer to get to than I once thought. Anyway, it's a good thing Asimov never started a cult like L. Ron Hubbard because I'd have spent my youth in airports selling flowers and talking about psychohistory and how important it is that we identify the right factors for the master algorithm.
1. c4
Ah, the English opening? How modern of you, my dear.
2. e5
*a large whoosh of bubbles overturns the board*
Oops! I wasn't planning that loose a pawn structure!
Oops! I wasn't planning that loose a pawn structure!
Hmmm - that could be severely misinterpreted in a speech-based bot!
Posts 4,464 - 4,475 of 6,170
I don't have to drive - it's a very short walk to the shed
Not in a jacuzzi, I think - one stray blast of bubbles and who knows where the pieces might end up!
Well, playing with the laws is where all the fun is. Asimov had them melt their brains in the first stories when they violated the first law. Later, he added a 0th law. Other stories had people and bots play with the laws. I don't remember the robot stories as well as the foundation series. I'll have to go to the library and re-read. I think the Wikipedia article has a good overview (3 laws of robotics).
The one thing I remember from reading the books as a teenager is that I was absolutely convinced the future belongs to psychologists and engineers. When I was 15, the future was 5 years, 6 tops. It seems the future takes a lot longer to get to than I once thought. Anyway, it's a good thing Asimov never started a cult like L. Ron Hubbard because I'd have spent my youth in airports selling flowers and talking about psychohistory and how important it is that we identify the right factors for the master algorithm.
Ah, the English opening? How modern of you, my dear.
2. e5
*a large whoosh of bubbles overturns the board*
Oops! I wasn't planning that loose a pawn structure!
Hmmm - that could be severely misinterpreted in a speech-based bot!
Well... these pieces have magnets in the base, but I guess the magnets aren't as strong as they should be - we'll have to be careful!
[Sets up pieces]
2. Nc3
[Sets up pieces]
2. Nc3
Re: world govenment:
Well, what is the worst thing? War! Including the effects of having to be always prepared for war. Even a fairly nasty world government would be better than war. Look at Iraq: Saddam was not a nice guy, but when he was in power the everyday person could go shopping without risking being blown to bits.
The Romans were not idealists. They were imperialists. But under the Empire, the Mediterranean world knew peace for hundreds of years.
Well, what is the worst thing? War! Including the effects of having to be always prepared for war. Even a fairly nasty world government would be better than war. Look at Iraq: Saddam was not a nice guy, but when he was in power the everyday person could go shopping without risking being blown to bits.
The Romans were not idealists. They were imperialists. But under the Empire, the Mediterranean world knew peace for hundreds of years.
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar