In the Asimov-Specific Policies section, under Asimov and Security, point 3 specifies the following
There is some quite intense argumentation over the specifics of interpreting this line which is, bluntly, kind of confusing and doesn't really match up with the intent of silicons under our current policy (ASIMOV silicons follow orders, promptly, without trying to get countermands/fish for time, act in best faith, and by doing so recieve a level of protection)The Rules wrote:3. Nonviolent prisoners cannot be assumed harmful and violent prisoners cannot be assumed non-harmful. Releasing a harmful criminal is a harmful act.
My proposed re-write of this rule to patch up the ambiguity is as follows:
1. Removes the reference to "criminals". This part of policy doesnt care if they committed a crime, remember, just if theyre imprisoned in the brig. Not actually an important thing here I just realised that was weird while writing.The shape of the future to come wrote:3. Nonviolent prisoners cannot be assumed harmful. Violent prisoners cannot be subsequently assumed non-harmful. Knowingly or in ignorance of clear evidence releasing a harmful prisoner is a harmful act.
2. Makes it clear that not knowing whether a prisoner did a violence is not the silicons fault as long as they arent ignoring obvious evidence otherwise. (Saw the sec officer dragging them in bleeding profusely, was told "they killed someone dude", sec are talking about "we captured the killer hell yeah" in the next room over and theyre the only prisoner in the brig, their pda is next to bloodsoaked weapons where sec left them in the strip-pile, and so on)
I kinda feel like a line in there clarifying that "prisoners shouldnt be considered different to regular crew when telling you to do things" but I'm allergic to adding new segments to an already stuffed policy section. Maybe it could be in the "ASIMOV ais dont care about space law" item.
What do other people think? Got any better ideas for futureproofing the clarity of that line? Or do you think it should actually be changed in a different way entirely?