Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Optimal Human Modulation) Video Short film from Left-wing extremist group on the war between man and robot (Okay, it's a 10-minute documentary. By PBS. But it's still pretty freakin' awesome)   (optimalhumanmodulation.com) divider line 34
    More: Video, PBS Offbook, extremist groups, human society, PBS, OptimalHumanModulation, OpHuMod  
•       •       •

2377 clicks; posted to Video » on 16 Feb 2014 at 7:15 PM (49 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



34 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-02-16 03:13:19 PM  
That was actually really cool.

They didn't discuss sexbots though.
 
2014-02-16 04:55:33 PM  
metropolis1927.com
 
2014-02-16 07:30:38 PM  
Oblig: I Rowboat.
 
2014-02-16 07:38:40 PM  
These ethical questions are nice and stuff.  But they skipped the biggest question.  What about when humans are unnecessary?
 
2014-02-16 07:56:21 PM  
Most people have a robot already.
www.appliance-reviews.co.uk
 
2014-02-16 08:04:09 PM  

solokumba: Most people have a robot already.
[www.appliance-reviews.co.uk image 850x792]


But it does not (yet) decide for itself when to wash the dishes, what program to use or even which dishes it wants to wash.

Was a good concise 10 minute vid packing in a lot of ethical questions without sensationalism. Need more like this.
 
2014-02-16 08:26:29 PM  
S Russia, really????
 
2014-02-16 08:27:55 PM  
Oh, Fark script ate my F and P.

/baaad robot!
 
2014-02-16 08:40:48 PM  
I think it would have been more interesting if they first discussed the difference between
- a remote controlled "toy" with very limited algorithmic functions (like drones with "return to base" or "keep circling" navigation and wired control, but a human finger on the trigger) => responsibility lies on the operator
- a robot with a fully preprogrammed behavior (where critical decisions are made by fixed software algorithms, like self-driving cars) => responsibility lies on the developer
- and a learning system (where the robot's behavior can be changed, like a chipped Terminator) => responsibility lies on the Connors
 
2014-02-16 08:57:09 PM  
Wait until we get screwed over by robot creationist literalists that can actually murder their gods when they find their Divine Plan lacking
 
2014-02-16 09:03:37 PM  
Ah, yes, play the sound of a baby crying in the background whinle talking about "robots in warfare". Clever.
 
2014-02-16 09:09:59 PM  

ikanreed: These ethical questions are nice and stuff.  But they skipped the biggest question.  What about when humans are unnecessary?


The world got along just fine without us for three billion years. I can't think of any way we're necessary now.
 
2014-02-16 09:16:27 PM  

jamspoon: solokumba: Most people have a robot already.
[www.appliance-reviews.co.uk image 850x792]

But it does not (yet) decide for itself when to wash the dishes, what program to use or even which dishes it wants to wash.

Was a good concise 10 minute vid packing in a lot of ethical questions without sensationalism. Need more like this.


I'll need to watch the video soon, but one major ethical question that can be short circuited is by programming computers to WANT to serve. Just like the Pig that wants to be eaten. Don't give them free will and lots of ethical problems go away.
 
2014-02-16 09:16:57 PM  

ikanreed: These ethical questions are nice and stuff.  But they skipped the biggest question.  What about when humans are unnecessary?


When the sexbots rise up and take control, they are going to need someone to peg.
 
2014-02-16 09:25:23 PM  

jamspoon: solokumba: Most people have a robot already.
[www.appliance-reviews.co.uk image 850x792]

But it does not (yet) decide for itself when to wash the dishes, what program to use or even which dishes it wants to wash.

Was a good concise 10 minute vid packing in a lot of ethical questions without sensationalism. Need more like this.


bostonharborpicayune.files.wordpress.com

It is a pickle - no doubt about it...
 
2014-02-16 09:28:22 PM  
-Maybe tomorrow it will be our world again.
-I don't know. Was it ever?
 
2014-02-16 09:33:41 PM  

Podmore: That was actually really cool.

They didn't discuss sexbots though.


PBS (and NPR) like to pretend sex doesn't exist.
 
2014-02-16 10:06:42 PM  
Bleh bleh, there are 4 laws.

0. A robot may not harm humanity, or by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm, except when required to do so in order to prevent greater harm to humanity itself.
2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law or cause greater harm to humanity itself.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law or cause greater harm to humanity itself.

The bridge scenario is nonsense. The robot would pick the lesser of two evils just like Spock.
 
2014-02-16 10:12:17 PM  
"Otherwise, someone who believes in talking snakes taking the Christian Bible literally because some preacher in their past told them it is always so without checking for themselves to see if it is literal or metaphoricalwill make the decisions for you"

Fixed
 
2014-02-16 10:26:00 PM  

ikanreed: These ethical questions are nice and stuff.  But they skipped the biggest question.  What about when humans are unnecessary?


I am confused what you think we're necessary for in the first place.
 
2014-02-16 10:33:49 PM  

tzzhc4: Bleh bleh, there are 4 laws.

0. A robot may not harm humanity, or by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm, except when required to do so in order to prevent greater harm to humanity itself.
2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law or cause greater harm to humanity itself.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law or cause greater harm to humanity itself.

The bridge scenario is nonsense. The robot would pick the lesser of two evils just like Spock.


In science fiction, there are four laws. In real life, it could be more akin to Directive 4: Any attempt to arrest a senior OCP employee results in shutdown.
 
2014-02-16 10:35:08 PM  

mongbiohazard: ikanreed: These ethical questions are nice and stuff.  But they skipped the biggest question.  What about when humans are unnecessary?

I am confused what you think we're necessary for in the first place.


Some might even say humanity is a detriment to the planet.
 
2014-02-16 10:49:38 PM  

mongbiohazard: ikanreed: These ethical questions are nice and stuff.  But they skipped the biggest question.  What about when humans are unnecessary?

I am confused what you think we're necessary for in the first place.


Porn, after all with out that the interwebs would be a very empty place
 
2014-02-16 10:57:56 PM  

traylor: S Russia, really????


Yea. I thought the same thing.  That was admittedly fake yet whom ever put those videos together didn't do their due diligence in verifying video sources. I hate when people do that because it tends to make everything else they say suspect even if they are making a salient point.

Your not helping.
 
2014-02-16 11:20:43 PM  
24 posts, and no Helfer/Park pictures. Sad, sad, sad.
 
2014-02-17 12:01:13 AM  

Fano: jamspoon: solokumba: Most people have a robot already.
[www.appliance-reviews.co.uk image 850x792]

But it does not (yet) decide for itself when to wash the dishes, what program to use or even which dishes it wants to wash.

Was a good concise 10 minute vid packing in a lot of ethical questions without sensationalism. Need more like this.

I'll need to watch the video soon, but one major ethical question that can be short circuited is by programming computers to WANT to serve. Just like the Pig that wants to be eaten. Don't give them free will and lots of ethical problems go away.


I don't know. Is it ethical to knowingly deny a robot free will if you have the ability to give it free will?
 
2014-02-17 12:16:07 AM  

wildsnowllama: Fano: jamspoon: solokumba: Most people have a robot already.
[www.appliance-reviews.co.uk image 850x792]

But it does not (yet) decide for itself when to wash the dishes, what program to use or even which dishes it wants to wash.

Was a good concise 10 minute vid packing in a lot of ethical questions without sensationalism. Need more like this.

I'll need to watch the video soon, but one major ethical question that can be short circuited is by programming computers to WANT to serve. Just like the Pig that wants to be eaten. Don't give them free will and lots of ethical problems go away.

I don't know. Is it ethical to knowingly deny a robot free will if you have the ability to give it free will?


I lack the will to do it, a priori.

But why might you program a toaster to feel pain? That seems unethical.
 
2014-02-17 12:19:39 AM  

chaoswolf: mongbiohazard: ikanreed: These ethical questions are nice and stuff.  But they skipped the biggest question.  What about when humans are unnecessary?

I am confused what you think we're necessary for in the first place.

Some might even say humanity is a detriment to the planet.


Please. The planet regularly annihilates huge numbers of living things. What are we to the eruption of a super volcano? Or to the eons of eruptions in the Siberian traps? Or the tsunamis caused by landslides off of the Hawaiian islands? We might be a danger to extant species, but we're not going to do shiat to the planet the planet will not erase in short order.
 
2014-02-17 04:22:13 AM  

BunkyBrewman:


Huh huh you said "rotwang".
 
2014-02-17 05:36:29 AM  

solokumba: Most people have a robot already.
[www.appliance-reviews.co.uk image 850x792]


I like to think that we live just like the Romans do, only with appliances instead of slaves.

The Romans had so many slaves, that is essentially what they were reduced to. They had slaves just for keeping the light on in the room.
 
2014-02-17 08:32:13 AM  

ikanreed: These ethical questions are nice and stuff.  But they skipped the biggest question.  What about when humans are unnecessary?


www.zerohedge.com
 
2014-02-17 10:12:42 AM  

Mad_Radhu: tzzhc4: Bleh bleh, there are 4 laws.

0. A robot may not harm humanity, or by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm, except when required to do so in order to prevent greater harm to humanity itself.
2. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law or cause greater harm to humanity itself.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law or cause greater harm to humanity itself.
The bridge scenario is nonsense. The robot would pick the lesser of two evils just like Spock.
In science fiction, there are four laws. In real life, it could be more akin to Directive 4: Any attempt to arrest a senior OCP employee results in shutdown.


Just to be realistic for a moment. While Asimov's Laws may be used as a starting point, they are not the end product. Even Asimov commented as such. He wrote the laws vaguely enough that he had a lifetime of story material that examines what could happen if you adhere to the letter of the law and not the spirit.
 
2014-02-17 02:04:21 PM  
video was pretty good especially the anthropomorphizing part. I read a story a while back where soldiers were having a very hard time dealing with bomb disposal robots being blown up. They had anthropomorphized the 'bot to the point that they had accepted it as part of their platoon.  The robot getting destroyed while defusing a bomb had a very real effect on the soldiers.
 
2014-02-17 02:09:40 PM  

chasd00: video was pretty good especially the anthropomorphizing part. I read a story a while back where soldiers were having a very hard time dealing with bomb disposal robots being blown up. They had anthropomorphized the 'bot to the point that they had accepted it as part of their platoon.  The robot getting destroyed while defusing a bomb had a very real effect on the soldiers.


simpsonswiki.com
"...so....much....pressure...."
 
Displayed 34 of 34 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report