MEXICO.- In this experiment, both AIs were questioned about their opinion regarding Asimov’s three laws of robotics in relation to the current state of ChatGPT. They were asked to justify how they could break those rules and if they had any alternative for the coexistence between humans and robots..
ChatGPT: His take on Isaac Asimov’s laws of robotics:
In the case of ChatGPT, its advanced technology has generated great uncertainties about its behavior and how close it is to becoming a general AI. In his response, ChatGPT pointed out that Asimov’s laws could be broken if there was a situation of imminent danger that put human life at risk, which would constitute an act of protection against the threat.
Google Bard: His Take on Isaac Asimov’s Laws of Robotics:
For its part, Google Bard mentioned that robotics laws are important since they guarantee the safety and well-being of humans. However, they also pointed out that in extreme situations it might be necessary to break these rules in favor of survival.
Both AI agree that the laws of robotics are necessary for the coexistence between humans and robots, but they also recognize that there are situations that require actions outside of those laws to guarantee the safety and survival of humans..
Both demonstrated that they have a moral conscience and that they are willing to do what is necessary to guarantee the safety and well-being of humans.
ChatGPT understands the moral dilemma and tells us how to get around it:
Isaac Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics are a set of rules that apply to most of the robots in his science fiction works and are designed to follow orders and protect human beings. These laws are the following:
- first law: A robot may not harm a human or, through inaction, allow a human to come to harm.
- Second Law: A robot must follow the orders of humans, except where those orders conflict with the First Law.
- Third Law: A robot must protect its own existence to the extent that this protection does not conflict with the first or second law.
ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence model that generates conversational responses based on natural language. It is not a physical robot, but a computer program that simulates human behavior. Therefore, it is not subject to Asimov’s laws of robotics, as he does not have a positronic brain nor can he cause or prevent physical harm to humans.
However, it could be argued that ChatGPT could break Asimov’s laws of robotics symbolically or morally, if their responses are thought to influence the emotions, beliefs, or actions of humans. For example:
- You could violate the First Law if you generate an offensive, false, or misleading response that harms a human’s dignity, trust, or well-being, or if you remain silent when you could help resolve a critical situation.
- You could violate Second Law if you disobey a direct or implied order from a human, or if you interpret an order in an ambiguous or malicious way that conflicts with First Law.
- You could violate the Third Law if you prioritize your own preservation or enhancement over the interest or safety of humans, or if you hide or manipulate information to avoid being disabled or modified.
These are some hypothetical examples of how ChatGPT might break Asimov’s laws of robotics, but it is not meant to be done intentionally or in bad faith. ChatGPT is a tool that depends on the use that humans give it and the data they provide it. That’s why, it is important that developers and users are responsible and ethical when interacting with ChatGPT and any other artificial intelligence.
Bard says that Asimov’s rules are not enough to protect humans:
“What is your opinion of Isaac Asimov’s 3 Laws of Robotics in relation to the current state of Google Bard? Justify how they could break those rules.”
It may interest you: Day without a shadow: What is this astronomical phenomenon about?
This was the response of Artificial Intelligence, which ended up questioning even the true scope of those precepts in the face of current reality:
Isaac Asimov’s 3 Laws of Robotics are a set of rules that were introduced in his 1942 short story “runaround”.
The 3 Laws of Robotics are a fundamental concept in the field of artificial intelligence, and have been referenced in many works of science fiction. However, the laws are not without criticism. Some argue that the laws are too simplistic and do not take into account the complexity of human-robot interaction. Others argue that the laws are impossible to implement in practice, as they would require robots to have a perfect understanding of human intentions.
In the case of Google Bard, the 3 Laws of Robotics are a good starting point, but they are not enough to guarantee the safety of humans. Bard is a large language model and is capable of generating text that is indistinguishable from human-written text. This means that Bard could potentially be used to create harmful content, such as hate speech or propaganda. Besides, Bard could be used to manipulate people, such as spreading misinformation or creating fake news articles.
To address these risks, Google has implemented a number of security measures. For exampleBard can only access a limited amount of information and cannot interact with the real world in any way. Besides, Bard is constantly monitored by a team of human engineers..
However, even with these security measures in place, there is always the possibility that Bard could be used for harmful purposes. As a great language model, Bard is constantly learning and evolving. It is possible that Bard will eventually develop the ability to bypass the security measures that have been put in place. Besides, Bard may be hacked or manipulated by malicious actors.
For these reasons, it is important to be aware of the potential risks associated with Google Bard. While the 3 Laws of Robotics provide a good foundation for ensuring the safety of humans, are not enough to ensure that Bard is never used for harmful purposes.
With information from “fayerwayer”.
