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 4,471 - 4,482 of 6,170
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!
d6? Ooh, Brother Jerome, you know just what I like!
Yes. I have been told that.
4. d4
e5xd4 then, since it's going begging.
Posts 4,471 - 4,482 of 6,170
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.
3. Nf3
Oh, Brother Jerome, would you scrub my back, right between the shoulder blades? It's a bit hard for me to reach in this position.
Oh, Brother Jerome, would you scrub my back, right between the shoulder blades? It's a bit hard for me to reach in this position.
So people have a right to a world government, because they have a right to a world without war.
And whatever advantages you might think there are to having a government, I should think most of them would apply on a world scale. Well, that depends on its being a fairly good government, I suppose!
And whatever advantages you might think there are to having a government, I should think most of them would apply on a world scale. Well, that depends on its being a fairly good government, I suppose!
Now, some people have a different view: that the ideal world will be a world of lots of very small nations, each one independent.
Well, that might be a nice world, but would it be a stable one? Sooner or later, perhaps, one of those countries is going to be tempted to pillage another. And then you will have war. In fact, countries will feel obliged to maintain armies just to avoid war, but such armies can also be a cause of war. At any rate, they are expensive, and hence divert resources from otherthings.
Ironically, we may need to have a world government to ensure decentralization!
Well, that might be a nice world, but would it be a stable one? Sooner or later, perhaps, one of those countries is going to be tempted to pillage another. And then you will have war. In fact, countries will feel obliged to maintain armies just to avoid war, but such armies can also be a cause of war. At any rate, they are expensive, and hence divert resources from otherthings.
Ironically, we may need to have a world government to ensure decentralization!
Yes. I have been told that.
e5xd4 then, since it's going begging.
» More new posts: Doghead's Cosmic Bar