Japan to confuse the hell out of robots

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Link

When the science fiction writer Isaac Asimov envisioned a future shared by human beings and robots, he predicted that the mechanical servants of tomorrow would be safely controlled by only three simple laws.

But when Japan?s notoriously zealous bureaucracy looks into the future, it sees robots enmeshed in miles of red tape.

Three laws, the robotics experts say, are nowhere near sufficient to ensure human safety in a world where cleaning, carrying and even cooking could one day be performed by machines. So the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry has drafted a hugely complex set of proposals for keeping robots in check.

The document, entitled Draft Guidelines to Secure the Safe Performance of Next Generation Robots, was obtained by The Timesyesterday. It extends to nearly 60 pages of civil service jargon. It calls for the formation of a special study group of industrialists, academics, ministry officials and, of course, lawyers to draw up a set of firm proposals to govern the development of robots.

Where Asimov?s first law of robotics states, ?A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm?, the principles of the ministry?s document are less hard and fast. ?Risk shall be defined as a combination of the occurrence rate of danger and the actual level of danger,? part of the rubric reads.

?Risk estimation involves estimating the potential level of danger and evaluating the potential sources of danger. Therefore total risk is defined as the danger of use of robots and potential sources of danger.?

The draft proposal demands that robots be equipped with the means for logging and communicating any injuries they cause to the people they are meant to be helping or protecting. It calls for a central database of all recorded incidents of humans harmed by robots, and demands that it be accessible by all robot-makers.

After a yet more convoluted process of public consultation, the ministry will draft, as early as May, a set of principles to which all robots must conform.

As a rapidly ageing country with a shrinking population of youngsters, Japan imagines robots playing a variety of roles.

To nationalistic politicians, the promise of robots helping the elderly offers a solution to demographic problems that might otherwise be solved by higher levels of immigration.

Robots that clean houses and chat with pensioners are already on the market; next-generation security patrol and nursing robots are, members of the Japan Robotics Association say, ?just months away?.

The ?helper? robot market as it stands is worth little more than 10 billion yen (£42 million), but the ministry believes that over the next 15 years the growing role of robots will push it to more than 3.3 trillion yen.

Meanwhile, Japanese progress in humanoid robotics continues. A University of Tokyo team recently succeeded in making a human-sized robot that can walk and carry loads of 30kg (65lb). An Osaka based security company has developed a house-sitting robot that will alert police if it finds an intruder or the emergency services if it detects a fire or flooding.

Man v machine

Asimov?s three laws:

? A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm

? A robot must obey 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

A selection from the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry guidelines:

? Via a structure of general regulation and the adoption of that regulation, the planning, manufacturing, administration, repair, sales and use of robots shall observe the need for safety at every stage

? The reasonably predictable misuse of robots shall be defined as the management, sale and use of next-generation robots for purposes not intended by manufacturers

? There should, in principle, be no serious accidents such as fatal accidents involving robots, and the frequency of such accidents should be lowered as far as possible. Affordable multiple security measures should be taken in case one protection method alone is insufficient

:confused: like Murphy in Robocop 2 after they f'd with his programming.
 

NanoStuff

Banned
Mar 23, 2006
2,981
1
0
The Italian administration took consideration of sentient robots and tried to determine factors which would suggest consciousness and thus necessarily individual rights. This is certainly something more countries will have to pay attention to in the coming decades or it's slavery all over again.
 

dainthomas

Lifer
Dec 7, 2004
14,897
3,860
136
Originally posted by: Queasy
Link

When the science fiction writer Isaac Asimov envisioned a future shared by human beings and robots, he predicted that the mechanical servants of tomorrow would be safely controlled by only three simple laws.

But when Japan?s notoriously zealous bureaucracy looks into the future, it sees robots enmeshed in miles of red tape.

Three laws, the robotics experts say, are nowhere near sufficient to ensure human safety in a world where cleaning, carrying and even cooking could one day be performed by machines. So the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry has drafted a hugely complex set of proposals for keeping robots in check.

The document, entitled Draft Guidelines to Secure the Safe Performance of Next Generation Robots, was obtained by The Timesyesterday. It extends to nearly 60 pages of civil service jargon. It calls for the formation of a special study group of industrialists, academics, ministry officials and, of course, lawyers to draw up a set of firm proposals to govern the development of robots.

Where Asimov?s first law of robotics states, ?A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm?, the principles of the ministry?s document are less hard and fast. ?Risk shall be defined as a combination of the occurrence rate of danger and the actual level of danger,? part of the rubric reads.

?Risk estimation involves estimating the potential level of danger and evaluating the potential sources of danger. Therefore total risk is defined as the danger of use of robots and potential sources of danger.?

The draft proposal demands that robots be equipped with the means for logging and communicating any injuries they cause to the people they are meant to be helping or protecting. It calls for a central database of all recorded incidents of humans harmed by robots, and demands that it be accessible by all robot-makers.

After a yet more convoluted process of public consultation, the ministry will draft, as early as May, a set of principles to which all robots must conform.

As a rapidly ageing country with a shrinking population of youngsters, Japan imagines robots playing a variety of roles.

To nationalistic politicians, the promise of robots helping the elderly offers a solution to demographic problems that might otherwise be solved by higher levels of immigration.

Robots that clean houses and chat with pensioners are already on the market; next-generation security patrol and nursing robots are, members of the Japan Robotics Association say, ?just months away?.

The ?helper? robot market as it stands is worth little more than 10 billion yen (£42 million), but the ministry believes that over the next 15 years the growing role of robots will push it to more than 3.3 trillion yen.

Meanwhile, Japanese progress in humanoid robotics continues. A University of Tokyo team recently succeeded in making a human-sized robot that can walk and carry loads of 30kg (65lb). An Osaka based security company has developed a house-sitting robot that will alert police if it finds an intruder or the emergency services if it detects a fire or flooding.

Man v machine

Asimov?s three laws:

? A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm

? A robot must obey 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

A selection from the Japanese Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry guidelines:

? Via a structure of general regulation and the adoption of that regulation, the planning, manufacturing, administration, repair, sales and use of robots shall observe the need for safety at every stage

? The reasonably predictable misuse of robots shall be defined as the management, sale and use of next-generation robots for purposes not intended by manufacturers

? There should, in principle, be no serious accidents such as fatal accidents involving robots, and the frequency of such accidents should be lowered as far as possible. Affordable multiple security measures should be taken in case one protection method alone is insufficient

:confused: like Murphy in Robocop 2 after they f'd with his programming.

Assuming that a sentient robot would have to employ some type of quantum computer, 60 pages of guidelines wouldn't be a big deal.
 

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,596
19
81
Originally posted by: dainthomas

Assuming that a sentient robot would have to employ some type of quantum computer, 60 pages of guidelines wouldn't be a big deal.
Unless there are loopholes. ;)
 

Looney

Lifer
Jun 13, 2000
21,938
5
0
As much as i like Asimov and his series of books, lets be real here; He's a science fiction writer, and it's going to take more than 3 laws to govern all robots and their behavior.
 

Kadarin

Lifer
Nov 23, 2001
44,296
16
81
Azimov, by the way, did add another law: "A robot may not harm humanity, or, by inaction, allow humanity to come to harm"

Technically, this was the Zeroeth Law.
 

newmachineoverlord

Senior member
Jan 22, 2006
484
0
0
these data monitoring requirements will greatly ease the process of insurance risk estimation.

Nevertheless, not even death can save you from us.
 

mercanucaribe

Banned
Oct 20, 2004
9,763
1
0
I don't see anything in there about protecting the rights of sentient robots. So we're already on track toward slavery??
 

Queasy

Moderator<br>Console Gaming
Aug 24, 2001
31,796
2
0
Originally posted by: dainthomas
Assuming that a sentient robot would have to employ some type of quantum computer, 60 pages of guidelines wouldn't be a big deal.

Yes, but is even a quantum computer powerful enough to handle bureaucrat-ese and legal-ese?