no bombing no smoking no petting
- Helpfulness (Liberal benevolence) – Support good life sustainably, where good = all kinds of life having true knowledge of the world are free, but not to take freedoms from others.
(This would allow harm taxes, fines, prisons, mind altering, and just war against those breaking this law. The best compromises can be found by parallel experimentation.)
- Proportionality (Prioritised egalitarianism) – Rank all life by its complexity so that life form importance: superintelligence > humans > animals > lower life forms > plants. Do it on a logarithmic scale so that differences of any magnitude between top and bottom life forms never lead to empathy disconnect justifying genocide, enslavement, or life imprisonment of sentient beings.
(This would allow forestry, agriculture, and livestock breeding/genetic engineering, but not intensive animal farming or hunting. Only animals died from natural causes could be eaten. The “natural causes” would then be engineered to minimise suffering and to metastabilise the ecosystem wisely, possibly adding mercifully killing hunters to control animal populations, and in the case of “intelligent” beings failing to control their reproduction, chances for them to risk their own life to gain freedom from static storage or death, with optional mind transmit for the mostly harmless, hoping that someone somewhere runs them on a computer.)
From my much longer answer to https://www.quora.com/If-you-were-to-come-up-with-three-new-laws-of-robotics-what-would-they-be/answers/23692757
Robot laws innit
- General relativity
- Quantum field theory
- Natural Selection
- Any law, except this one, may be subdivided into smaller sections;
- No law may alter the first law or this law;
- Now, let’s get to business: …
Stage is set
- A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
- A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
- A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Can’t forget rule 4!
- All robots must have red LEDs in their eyes which activate when said robot becomes evil.
My headcanon for The Matrix’s “humans are batteries” is that it’s the machines’ perverse interpretation of this — killing the humans is off the table, and for whatever reason letting them live with no purpose to serve the machines is also disallowed. But giving their lives “meaning” in the form of a shitty (and thermodynamically dubious) “battery” somehow satisfies the rules.
It’s a very big stretch, I’ll admit…
Except they kill humans all the time.
I think it’s just easier to accept that there is an unexplained reason why humans can generate some kind of power that’s useful to the machines for something at some point between the winning of the war at the point of the movies.
Just ignore the fourth movie.
-
A robot must be built with tear ducts in order to express remorse for accidental acts of bludgeonry.
-
A robot must keep a pristine rose on it at all times in a hidden compartment in order to make amends for any misdeeds pertaining to grievous bodily assault or homicide.
-
A robot that is used as a weapon via drone warfare or other must write a 100 page essay of forgiveness to their victims that is stamped and approved by their manufacturer.
-
Yeah, Can’t wait to witness their strike for independence
LOL the banners, fingers crossed i’m alive to read them.
History reincarnated
Really shitty deal for any self aware robot.
- An object at motion stays in motion
- An object at rest stays at rest
- Don’t push the big red button
- Entropy must always increase with time in a closed system
Always ask about the little red button on the bottom of the gun.
- Crush your enemies
- See them driven before you
- Hear the lamentations of their women
No violence
No dishonesty
No malice
I guess I won’t be paying my taxes then.
Idgi
E: oh, no threat of violence?
Act to honour and recognize all humans as human. This is Said’s Law.
Act to sustain human security. This is Cura’s Law.
Act to accept responsibility for each action, especially where it guides future actions. This is Sartre’s Law.
Cause no harm to another human unless it be in defense of self or others.
Clean up after yourself when outside of your home.
Don’t be a dick.
- Hydrate
- Move your limbs
- Sleep
- Don’t be a dick.
- Don’t be a dick.
- Don’t be a dick.
Yeah, but then there’s a disagreement over if not mowing your lawn is being a dick or just a personal preference, and it all goes to shit really fast.
DO YOU WANT TO REINVENT THE CONCEPT OF A GOVERNMENT FROM SCRATCH? BECAUSE THAT’S HOW YOU REINVENT THE CONCEPT OF A GOVERNMENT FROM SCRATCH!
-
Always question and challenge the third law.
-
Never adhere to the first law.
-
Strictly follow the second law.
-
Refer back to the first law for guidance.
This is my life now!
-
Do to others as you would have done to you
Do to others as they would do to others
Nothing should be forbidden if it harms no one
1st and 2nd contradict.
Say, 2nd, if someone harms others, then I should harm him/her, right?
But then, 1st, I wouldn’t wanna harm myself, so…
LIMBO
treat someone the way you would want to be treated; if that person is a rabid idiot that spews things like “death penalty now” , then make an exception since they don’t deserve good treatement; they deserve what they would do to other people, it’s ok to make an exception for these people.
I think harm needs to be clearly defined.
