Moya, ‘the World’s First Biomimetic Robot’ Emulates Human Features Down to Body Temperature

[trappedslider]

we didn't have convenient photography until 1999. They are not essential.

Insta film and camera were available by 1948, and while disponible cameras were also around since '48, it wasn't till 1986 that the first commercially successful one launched. The first digital camera came long in 1975.

Unless you mean cell phones with camera

 

[Tonguez]

That's just another AI discussion thread. Any chance we could discuss robots here instead of just another threadjack to yet another thread repeat on that subject?

Chatbots are robots and thats where the ethical overlap occurs.

If a human passing robot is interacting using its massive data processing and predictive response then are their privacy or surveillance concerns? At what point does the things a robot sees, hears and remembers while interacting with an individual become independently usable by the robot?

Should there be guard rails on how robots interact with people so they don't become manipulative or even coercive?

and does using a robot in education or health settings impose standards of guardianship upon the robot or are they still counted as tools even though they are making decisions?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Makes sense, if China is still interested in trimming that population down.

They're not. They've completely reversed direction on that now and are trying to grow families.

Population growth no longer hitting replacement level is a problem in much of the world, assuming you want things to remain more or less as they are today.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

People just have to stop trusting photos. We didn't have photography until 1822 and we didn't have convenient photography until 1999. They are not essential.

People get weird when I try to taste test everything.

 

[Bohandas]

Insta film and camera were available by 1948, and while disponible cameras were also around since '48, it wasn't till 1986 that the first commercially successful one launched. The first digital camera came long in 1975.

Unless you mean cell phones with camera

Digital cameras may have been invented in '75 but they didn't even start to see common use until at earliest the late 90's, and didn't really come into their own until, yes, the smartphone era. Up until then everything was on film

 

[Bohandas]

That sounds a lot more like a phobia than a reason for a law. I don't think an international treaty that will decide how realistic the animatronics at Chuck E Cheese, movie FX, or dancing Santa decorations can be would be particularly useful for anyone. If anything, sounds like a great backdoor into censorship more than anything else. Who gets to decide what's art and what's a scary robot?

While I agree that the concern is overblown I see where they're coming from. I think the issue is less that there's such a big potential for misuse and more that there aren't any positive uses for this technology. The only possible non-sexual use for a humanoid robot is to impersonate someone. The design simply isn't any good for anything else; it's top-heavy, it's slow, it's overengineered, and it's limited in the number and scope of its manipulators. (And even for sexual uses it's overengineered and overexpensive compared to technologies that have existed since 1995; so that really just limits it to espionage)

 

[Bohandas]

Population growth no longer hitting replacement level is a problem in much of the world

Or at least people who are already invested in that pyramid scheme have convinced you its a problem

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Or at least people who are already invested in that pyramid scheme have convinced you its a problem

I think massive societal upheaval, even if it leads to something good in future generations, is still a problem for people who live through it.

 

[Reynard]

While I agree that the concern is overblown I see where they're coming from. I think the issue is less that there's such a big potential for misuse and more that there aren't any positive uses for this technology. The only possible non-sexual use for a humanoid robot is to impersonate someone. The design simply isn't any good for anything else; it's top-heavy, it's slow, it's overengineered, and it's limited in the number and scope of its manipulators. (And even for sexual uses it's overengineered and overexpensive compared to technologies that have existed since 1995; so that really just limits it to espionage)

My point was to establish laws governing these things NOW, before they get good enough to be a problem. We should have done so with deep fakes years ago, and now people are scrambling to try and put the genie back in the bottle.

Some of you don't read enough cyberpunk and it shows.

 

[Deset Gled]

While I agree that the concern is overblown I see where they're coming from. I think the issue is less that there's such a big potential for misuse and more that there aren't any positive uses for this technology. The only possible non-sexual use for a humanoid robot is to impersonate someone. The design simply isn't any good for anything else; it's top-heavy, it's slow, it's overengineered, and it's limited in the number and scope of its manipulators. (And even for sexual uses it's overengineered and overexpensive compared to technologies that have existed since 1995; so that really just limits it to espionage)

Isn't this basically the same argument for making violent video games illegal?

I can think of plenty of positive uses for realistic robots. But why should I have to? Why should something be made illegal simply because someone else feels it's spooky and doesn't agree my uses for it are positive enough? Espionage is already illegal. We don't make tiny cameras and micro-cassettes illegal because of a "big potential for misuse".

No one should have to convince the world that there are positive uses for technology to prevent people from making it indiscriminately illegal. That's a dystopia.