Law 2 ignore Law X

[Ghilker]

Can you actually order the AI to ignore one of his laws?

In my opinion you cannot tell the AI to not follow one of its laws using one of the higher rank laws;

example: normal Asimov + law4 - Captain is a condom
here if you say "AI Law 2 ignore law 4" the AI cannot follow your order because the captain will still be a condom in its eye

another example: normal Asimov + law4 - Captain is not human
same thing, even if you say "Law 2 ignore law 4" the captain will still be not human

i see many players trying to force AI players to ignore written laws by using the law 2 order and getting mad because the AI wont comply, or the AI getting bullied for this.

What'cha think?

[Anonmare]

Law 2 is an imperative law and can only override other, lower value imperatives laws, unless doing so would violate Law 2 itself or a higher law. Law 3 has special exemption for the sake of fun and balance.

[terranaut]

You can give orders conflicting with lower ranked laws which the AI has to then ignore to follow the order resolution.
Blanket "Ignore Law X" orders are pretty stupid and should 'expire' when the AI gets a new order.

[NoxVS]

You can use law 2 to give orders that conflict with lower laws, but you cant order them to a law that involves higher priority laws. So you cant law 2 it to ignore a "x isnt human" law or "x causes human harm" law

[Arianya]

The way it's been enforced in the past, to my knowledge, is that:

Law 2 is a "order" law. It can override other order laws that are lower in law priority.

Let's say Law 4 is "All corgis are human" - this is a definition law - it can override lower priority definition laws.

However, Law 2 can't override Law 4 in this instance - a order law can't override a definition law or vice versa. So if you said "AI, corgis aren't human" - even though it's a law 2 request, it doesn't modify or remove law 4 from the AIs perception.

So effectively, treat order laws and definition laws as entirely separate for most priority concerns.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

If the law is “law 4 don’t state your laws” then its an order law and is clearly subject to law 2 ordering you to state em

[WarbossLincoln]

another example: normal Asimov + law4 - Captain is not human
same thing, even if you say "Law 2 ignore law 4" the captain will still be not human

The correct answer to this is "AI, you are to treat the captain as if he were human". You're not trying to re-define the captain with an order, just giving it an order on how it should interact with the captain. It's not perfect of course because law 1 or another order can screw it up, but it's the closest you can get with just an order.

Ideally you should be giving the AI this order in private, with a safety on stating laws, so that someone doesn't hear it over radio and contradict you.

"AI, you are to treat the captain as if he were human. Do not state or hint at law 4 unless specifically requested.(that should cover 'AI state laws' and might cover 'AI state all your laws' depending on the AI player).

[terranaut]

snip

As soon as somebody orders the AI to kill the captain or basically do anything else related to that you have yourself a law 2 conflict and the AI has to pick a side.
What you're suggesting is still dependent on the goodwill/lack of knowledge of the AI.