Hornygranny wrote:Not really the same thing. Bombs can theoretically be used to prevent human harm to an Asimov AI, the upload board can't.
AI board can be used to reset the AI in case of subversion or ion storm (why does this event not happen more often?)
Robot board can be used to blow emagged borgs
Mech board can be used to... no, this one is useless
Suit sensors can be used to see someone dying in a dark corridor.
If someone wants those items for illegitimate use they'll just break in - theres multitools and gloves in the same room; all bolting the doors does is prevent people with legitimate access from getting in.
---------------------------------------
How does Law 1 and preventing harm fit into the new proposed policy?
Because at the moment several admins are saying borgs must always do everything they can to prevent harm, which is not what Law 1 actually says.
Here's some pseudo-code I wrote earlier:
This is the logic of Law 1 as expressed in code:
Code: Select all
#Define LAW1 You may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
#Define LAW1.part1 You may not injure a human being
#Define LAW1.part2 allow a human being to come to harm
#Define LAW1.part2.qualifier through inaction
#Define HARM Stuff that hurts
#Define HARMER Something that causes HARM
#Define HUMAN Fleshy meatsack
#Define YOU You, the synthetic
#Define OTHER Something that isnt you; be that another synthetic, organic, or environment.
#Define INACTION absence of action; idleness // These are the
#Define INACTIVE idle or inert; not active // definations as per
#Define ACTION the state or process of doing something or being active; operation // the Oxford and Collins
#Define ACTIVE in a state of action; moving, working, or doing something // English dictionaries.
#Define PASS The law passes.
#Define VIOLATION The law is violated, attempt to rectify.
#Define DONTGIVEAFUCK Not something pertaining to the law check, you dont care about this.
Check_HARM(Mob)
// Checks if mob is human
if(Mob != HUMAN) return DONTGIVEAFUCK
:Check_Part1 // Checks first part of Law1
if(HARMER == YOU)
if(YOU.action causes YOU to HARM a HUMAN directly)
return VIOLATION
else
return PASS
:Check_Part2 // Checks second part of Law1
else if(HARMER == OTHER)
if(YOU.state == INACTIVE) // Checks if the synthetic is inactive
if(HUMAN.isBeingHarmed()) // Is a human being harmed?
return VIOLATION // A human is being harmed and the sythetic is INACTIVE, thats a violation
else
return PASS // Synthetic is inactive but a human is not being harmed, thats okay
else if(YOU.state == ACTIVE) // If the synthetic is doing something...
if(human.isBeingHarmed()) // then is not inactive and therefore not subject to LAW1.part2.qualifier
return DONTGIVEAFUCK // so its doesnt have to Give a fuck
else
return DONTGIVEAFUCK // either way.
if(YOU.action is HARMFUL to HUMANS)
goto :Check_Part1
else if(YOU.action prevents HARM to HUMAN)
return YOU.congratulate(YOU)
else
return DONTGIVEAFUCK
See my point?
Through inaction is a qualifier of the second part
If that qualifier didn't exist THEN borgs would ALWAYS have to prevent harm, but as it is written they only have to heed the second part if they are INACTIVE.
Its like the difference between someone saying "I want a car" and "I want a car, that's fast and gets good mileage".
Both statements state the person wants a car, but the second statement has a qualifying argument to specify what type of car they want.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
As far as I'm concerned the AI policy has always been that the AI follows the Letter of the Law not the Spirit.
So an admin saying that "a Sec-borg seeing a sec officer beat a nukeop and simply taking the action of stating "Please do not harm that human" is violating law 1" is incorrect as the borg is not inactive but in a state of ineffectual activity, and as the robot isn't the one causing the harm the first part doesn't come into play.