What would happen if there were robots who could think, create and improve things just like us? Would they always served us without payments? After a while there would be a chaos because both robots wouldn’t like to serve us for free and people might not want to take robots’ responsibilities.
For instance, what will happen if robots do something good? If a robot writes a book and earns money, who will get the money? The robot, the person who has built the robot or the owner of the robot? One might think that a robot earning money would be perfect, but robots may also commit a crime. Then this can change one’s mind.
When we talk about positive things, earning money, we all accept, but what about bad things? What will happen if robots steal something? Who will be responsible for it? We do not want to be punished because of something we have not done.
For example “self-driving cars”. They are cars without drivers which means the cars are driven by artificial intelligence. If a car like this crushes and the passenger dies, who will be liable for the damage? The artificial intelligence or the person who has designed it? On the other hand, one might earn money by using “self-driving cars”. One can turn the car into a taxi. Then he or she can be a millionaire.
Another example is a robot who can code. This robot may code games and earn lots of money. Even the robot might code a program like “Windows”. Then Bill Gates would have a big rival. Also this robot may be a hacker. It can become a criminal. Then you won’t want to be arrested as the owner or the designer of the robot.
The last example is a robot who is a judge. The robot would be able to read the cases in a really short time and it would know all the specific law articles, so it can make a fair and the most appropriate decision. However, it may not think emotionally as a human being. Then you might think that its decisions are not fair and the most appropriate.
Consequently, there must be a notion like “digital personality”. So let’s look at the definition of digital personality.
In 2017, the European Parliament asked the European Commission to propose a definition for “electronic personality” for sophisticated autonomous robots. After this, a number of experts published an open letter in April 2018 calling upon the Commission to ignore the Parliament’s move and reject “electronic personality”. According to this letter, it would be inappropriate and dysfunctional to introduce such a legal status. The European Commission has outlined its future strategy to address artificial intelligence. The definition of “electronic personality” remains unclear.
Actually I disagree with the Commission. The robots must have personalities and in my opinion “digital personality” is the best solution. If robots would have their own kind of personality, they can make money, can be held liable for their mistakes and even appropriate punishment can be created for “robot crimes”. We can predict that a whole new legal system should be built if robots with artificial intelligence take a prominent place in our lives.
There also must be rights for robots who can think, create and improve things like us. They even might be cleverer than us. So, why they cannot have rights like we have got? There must be “laws of robots” in order to manage the financial issues and crimes.
All in all, robots will have personalities like us in the future, so we must be open-minded in many fields and design new rules to live peacefully and comfortably together with the robots. If we succeed in this, there won’t be any chaos.
Thank you for listening to me.
SUZAN R. HOFSTEDE, 2020
Yorumlar
Yorum Gönder