Robotics Reference
In-Depth Information
intelligent robots, and claimed it to be more of a sociological problem
than one of physical danger:
Inexorably, we will interact more with machines and less with each
other. Already, the average American worker spends an astonish-
ingly large percentage of his/her life interfacing with machines.
Many return home only to log in anew. Human relationships are
a lot of trouble, forged from dirty diapers, lost tempers and late
nights. Machines, on the other hand, can be turned on and off.
Already, many of us prefer to forge and maintain relationships via
e-mail, chat rooms and instant messenger rather than in person.
Despite promises that the Internet will take us anywhere, we find
ourselves, hour after hour, glued to our chairs. [10]
The turn of the twenty-first century saw a flurry of interest in the ethical
implications of AI. Much of this flurry was due to the April 2000 edition
of
Wired
magazine, which carried an intellectually earth-shaking article
by Bill Joy entitled “Why the Future Doesn't Need Us”. Joy is a co-
founder and chief scientist of Sun Microsystems, a mover and shaker
in the world of hi-tech, and in a better position than most to forecast
the progress of robotics and their effects on society. In his article Joy
envisaged a very bleak future for humanity if we continue to research and
design self-replicating technologies such as robotics, genetic engineering
and nanotechnology. Joy sees huge dangers in such technologies and
in the irresponsibility of the people who work in this field: “From the
moment I became involved in the creation of new technologies, their
ethical dimensions have concerned me.” [11]
A similarly pessimistic outlook to Joy's was presented by John Leslie, a
philosopher at Guelph University. In his topic
The End of the World: The
Science and Ethics of Human Extinction
, Leslie predicts various ways in
which intelligent machines might cause the extinction of mankind. Leslie
also fears that it would be possible for machines to override any in-built
safeguards: “If you have a very intelligent system it could unprogram
itself. We have to be careful about getting into a situation where they
take over against our will or with our blessing.”
Joy's article created a whirlwind of response. Ray Kurzweil wrote an
article, “Promise and Peril”, enunciating his belief that it is possible to
overreact to a vision of robotic Armageddon and arguing that the poten-
tial benefits of AI make it impossible to turn our backs on the science.
And Max More's rebuttal of Joy's article, entitled “Embrace, Don't Relin-
