this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
173 points (97.3% liked)

Asklemmy

43394 readers
1414 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Asimov: "The 'robots take over the world' plot is overdone. I think humans would make robots intrinsically safe through these three laws."

Movie: "What if the robots interpreted the three laws in such a way that they decided to take over the world??!?"

The only good part of that movie was when Will Smith's sidekick was like "this thing runs on gasoline! Don't you know gasoline explodes?!"

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

A running theme of Asimov's Robot stories is that the Three Laws are inadequate. Robots that aren't smart and insightful enough keep melting down their positronic brains when they reach contradictions or are placed in irreconcilable situations. Eventually Daneel and Giskard come up with the Zeroth Law; and if I recall correctly they only manage that because Daneel is humaniform and Giskard is telepathic.

spoilerAnd the robots do take over, eventually!

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

There were flaws, yes, but they never rose to the level of attempting to destroy humanity that I recall. We had a sort of plot armor in that Asimov wasn’t interested in writing that kind of story.

I’m getting this from a forward he wrote for one of the robot book compilations.

[–] fubo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Oh, sure, the robots never want to destroy and replace humanity, but they do end up taking quite a lot of control of humanity's future.

[–] hansl@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Wasn’t the last I, Robot story about how the robots directly the world’s politics decide that we were living better and longer lives without technology and brought the world back to medieval level of tech?

[–] morriscox@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Wasn't there books that he wrote that were about flaws in the Three Laws?

[–] ch00f@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Flaws or interesting interpretations of them, but he rarely if ever approached the “robots destroy humanity” trope even if it was technically possible in his universe because he thought it was boring.

[–] hansl@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah it’s more about whatever safe guards you put life will find a way to twist them.

[–] qevlarr@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Life, uh, finds a way