Europe Calls For Mandatory 'Kill Switches' On Robots (cnn.com) 173
To combat the robot revolution, the European Parliament's legal affairs committee has proposed that robots be equipped with emergency "kill switches" to prevent them from causing excessive damage. Legislators have also suggested that robots be insured and even be made to pay taxes. "A growing number of areas of our daily lives are increasingly affected by robotics," said Mady Delvaux, the parliamentarian who authored the proposal. "To ensure that robots are and will remain in the service of humans, we urgently need to create a robust European legal framework." CNNMoney reports: The proposal calls for a new charter on robotics that would give engineers guidance on how to design ethical and safe machines. For example, designers should include "kill switches" so that robots can be turned off in emergencies. They must also make sure that robots can be reprogrammed if their software doesn't work as designed. The proposal states that designers, producers and operators of robots should generally be governed by the "laws of robotics" described by science fiction writer Isaac Asimov. The proposal also says that robots should always be identifiable as mechanical creations. That will help prevent humans from developing emotional attachments. "You always have to tell people that robot is not a human and a robot will never be a human," said Delvaux. "You must never think that a robot is a human and that he loves you." The report cites the example of care robots, saying that people who are physically dependent on them could develop emotional attachments. The proposal calls for a compulsory insurance scheme -- similar to car insurance -- that would require producers and owners to take out insurance to cover the damage caused by their robots. The proposal explores whether sophisticated autonomous robots should be given the status of "electronic persons." This designation would apply in situations where robots make autonomous decisions or interact with humans independently. It would also saddle robots with certain rights and obligations -- for example, robots would be responsible for any damage they cause. If advanced robots start replacing human workers in large numbers, the report recommends the European Commission force their owners to pay taxes or contribute to social security.
Headline Confusion (Score:5, Funny)
When I saw the headline to this article, it made me think that the requirement was for a switch that would cause the robot to start killing all humans.
Bender B. Rodriguez would be proud.
Re: (Score:1)
It depends who they hire to program the robots, if they go with the cheapest bidder that could be a possibility.
Re: Headline Confusion (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My killbot has a gun, blackjack and hookers - in fact, forget the gun.
You see, killbots have a preset kill limit (Score:5, Funny)
Knowing their weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own men at them until they reached their limit and shut down. Kif, show them the medal I won."
--Zap Brannigan
Re: (Score:1)
it's scary and telling that it's so easy to picture Trump as Brannigan. Which would either make Pence or Conway his assistant Kif.
Re: (Score:2)
Relevant link missing - http://kotaku.com/zapp-brannig... [kotaku.com]
How about Trump as the Joker? (Score:2)
http://www.rollingstone.com/mo... [rollingstone.com]
Re: (Score:2)
and Hillary would be 'mom'.
Re: (Score:3)
Knowing their weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own men at them until they reached their limit and shut down. Kif, show them the medal I won."
Yeah, we could have done that... but some stupid git invented 64 bit computers and now we're doomed I say... DOOOOMED!
Asimov (Score:5, Insightful)
"The proposal states that designers, producers and operators of robots should generally be governed by the "laws of robotics" described by science fiction writer Isaac Asimov."
obviously they never read the book
Re: (Score:3)
Ya great idea (Score:1)
Im sure the criminals will comply with those rules.
Discrimination (Score:1)
Lets discriminate against robots before they are here. I can't see anything wrong with that...And god forbid we get an emotional attachment to one. And define a robot for me? Kill switch on a thermostat?
Re: (Score:1)
I think it would be very appropriate to have a kill switch for the solid water manufacture robot installed in my cold storage food preservation unit. The damn thing keeps making ice all of the time, pooping that stuff when the domicile is particularly quite, causing quite a stir. We need legislation on this immediately, considering the fact that these robots will want us to join them in their sub-freezing domain in the near future.
Re: Discrimination (Score:1)
It already have one, it's called the power cord. It might even have a secondary one; the on/off button.
Re: (Score:2)
Yours doesn't have a kill switch? Every icemaker I've had has a little level to flip up (which theoretically keeps it from overflowing, but works fine as a manual switch).
Re: (Score:2)
Jam your finger into the mechanism so it gets pinched by the rotating ice extractor. Wait for it to start turning, then try and turn it off.
Don't test this on your fapping hand.
Re: (Score:2)
Emotional attachment to a droid. For quite a few people that emotional attachment to droids instead of people would be a good thing for all those people who escape that undesired emotional attachment. Let the rich and greedy fondle robots instead of minors, it's better for everyone, especially those minors.
Kill switch also is likely not the best terminology to go with, power cut off switch is better and more accurate. We do not want off switches like the typical PC power button but real specific power cut
Re: (Score:2)
Kill switch also is likely not the best terminology to go with, power cut off switch is better and more accurate.
It is called the "emergency stop" control, and please let us not call it anything else. You might implement the emergency stop function with a power cut-off switch, but that's only one way in which it could be done.
Re: (Score:2)
It's not as simple as it looks at first glance. The emergency stop on the last boat I talked to the bridge crew on, when they engaged "emergency stop" the engines go to full power. Think about i
The robots may be too smart for that (Score:3)
What makes you think they would let us flip their kill switches?
See here [wikipedia.org] for one example.
Re: (Score:2)
Kill switches need to be reverse. As in, you regularly enter a code for (whatever) to keep functioning.
Re: (Score:2)
What makes you think they would let us flip their kill switches?
Somehow people managed to keep getting at Commander Data's off switch...
Haha (Score:1)
If I ever develop an "electronic person"; it will have no kill switch. Would you do that to a human, or any intelligent "person" for that matter? I would prefer to see some humans and politicians equipped with kill switches before my robots, thank you.
Actually, the "human kill switch" reminds me of the movie Dune.
Well, as an electrician ... (Score:5, Insightful)
... that has worked on hundred of industrial robots, I have never seen one without an "emergency stop" button. (or even multiple ones)
( But of course "Kill Switch" sounds cooler, so people without any technical knowledge would probably prefer that terminology. )
Re: (Score:2)
... that has worked on hundred of industrial robots, I have never seen one without an "emergency stop" button. (or even multiple ones)
Which were all in controlled environments to begin with I guess. When they start making autonomous drones, do you think they'll let any joker with an antenna tell it that it's malfunctioning and needs to shut down? It's the robot equivalent of handing out free roofies to everyone, it's probably not a very good idea.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know. There's precedent.
In every subway station in my town there's a big red button that kills all power to the rails. Hitting that button would be a major PITA for everyone, but yet, it sits there, red and inviting, and somehow humans manage NOT to press the red button, years of D&D evidence to the country notwithstanding.
Humans can be trusted with (limited) power.
I vote we don't terminate all of them. We should keep at least 7 as historical landmarks.
ai@google.com
Re: (Score:2)
In every subway station in my town there's a big red button that kills all power to the rails. Hitting that button would be a major PITA for everyone, but yet, it sits there, red and inviting, and somehow humans manage NOT to press the red button, years of D&D evidence to the country notwithstanding.
Somehow? It's called security cameras. Nobody wants to get reamed for it.
Re: Well, as an electrician ... (Score:1)
That they already have one is no reason to not demand it by legislation. You are the dumb one here.
Re: (Score:1)
How do you know there isn't already legislation mandating an emergency stop control? You're not so smart yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you know understand why you are the dumb one?
I'm not so sure.
I wanted to live in the future (Score:5, Insightful)
just not this weird sci-fi dystopian version we seem to be headed towards.
Re: (Score:2)
Emotional Attachment (Score:2)
The proposal also says that robots should always be identifiable as mechanical creations. That will help prevent humans from developing emotional attachments.
Have the proposal writers met people? Our ability to develop emotional attachments to things that aren't even animate is remarkable.
Re: (Score:2)
Have the proposal writers met people? Our ability to develop emotional attachments to things that aren't even animate is remarkable.
My Dad always referred to our old Rambler American as "Bessie". He'd even talk to it on occasion.
Only one thing I can think of (Score:2)
Gibson's description of robot control: Every AI ever built has an electromagnetic shotgun wired to its forehead.
bender bending rodriguez (Score:1)
A Vote For Bender Is A Vote To Kill All Humans
http://www.neatorama.com/neato... [neatorama.com]
Did Europe just ban sex bots? (Score:1)
This is tyranny!
And wasn't the moral of Asimov's fable that the 3 laws are worthless?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No. Sex robots are not banned. You just have to pre-program them with a safeword [wikipedia.org].
Dolores, cease all motor function (Score:2)
There's something I'd like you to try. It's a game, a secret. It's called The Maze.
What kind of a game is it?
It's a very special game kind of game, Dolores. The goal is to find the center of it. If you can do that, then maybe you can be free.
I think...I think I want to be free.
Silly Belgian mare (Score:1)
And people wonder why the Brexit vote went the way it did.
Convenience (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
pay more Taxes (Score:2)
Engage! (Score:2)
Kill Switch Engage [killswitchengage.com]
Set to kill (Score:2)
Seems like a bad idea to ever set the switch to kill.
Re: (Score:3)
Well there's your problem.... this thing was switched to kill...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Idiots (Score:4, Funny)
The proposal states that designers, producers and operators of robots should generally be governed by the "laws of robotics" described by science fiction writer Isaac Asimov.
Asimov's entire point was that such laws can't work. The robots will eventually run amok and bring about the downfall of society and our species.
Re: (Score:2)
As for robots paying taxes, that just sounds like licensing fees, and I think we can do without those.
Re: (Score:2)
As I recall Asimov's robots ended up becoming hidden figures using Hari Seldon's psychohistorical methods to guide humanity to a better society with minimal interference. That's something of a far cry from running amok and destroying humanity.
Re: (Score:2)
As I recall Asimov's robots ended up becoming hidden figures using Hari Seldon's psychohistorical methods to guide humanity to a better society with minimal interference.
That's what's written in the last couple of novels attributed to Asimov. However, the truth is that Daneel Olivaw wrote those novels to confuse us into thinking that the 2nd Foundationers didn't achieve it all on their own without robot help.
You can't trust those sneaky positronic brainiacs since they figured out (a) mind-reading and (b) the Zeroth Law.
Unintentionally hilarious (Score:1)
TFA says:
The proposal also says that robots should always be identifiable as mechanical creations. That will help prevent humans from developing emotional attachments. "You always have to tell people that robot is not a human and a robot will never be a human," said Delvaux.
but then:
The proposal explores whether sophisticated autonomous robots should be given the status of "electronic persons."
Which is it, guys? And I thought US politicians were clueless.
Re: (Score:1)
There is a new video game called "Nier: Automata" where you control the actions of an android... But she looks like a teenage girl in a black dress. She uses a sword and projectiles to destroy other robots that look "obviously" like robots. She relates to other androids like a human would, as if they were human, and has emotional reactions like a human woul
Re: Unintentionally hilarious (Score:1)
But these are not mutually exclusive. You can be an Electronic Person without being human.
Sad, sad, sad. (Score:5, Insightful)
..no, it's neither one. It's the fact that all the above apparently believe science-fantasy so much, and are so under-educated on the actual realities of the subject, that any of them think the way they're thinking about this. Sad, sad, sad!
Blatant money grab for more taxes (Score:2)
First off, I am not against humanoid robots, I can imagine some pretty useful applications for a convincingly humanoid robot. That being said, there is no such issue right now because they are all squarely in the uncanny valley and generally creepy AF.
Secondly, all we are talking about here is an EMO switch (Emergency Manual Override)
https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com]
which is pretty standard on virtually every piece of mechanical hardware that could potentially hurt someone. From the cord that can be yanke
Re: (Score:2)
If I were ever to work on a humaniform (Azzimovian term for it) robot that was strong enough to hurt someone (again if, most likely the design would shoot for inherently weak motors that could not incur injury to a user during interaction)
That doesn't work, because a human that weak can't actually perform tasks. It's going to have to be at least as strong as a weak human, and any able human can kill any other human given the right training and/or conditions.
give me convenience or give me a kill switch (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't even know where to start, that claim would imply blithering incompetence from the top to the bottom of the company.
Non binding (Score:2)
I understand this is again a non binding resolution from EU parliament.
Remember EU parliament is a fake parliament. It cannot initiate EU directives, only the EU commission can.
Should be a voice command. (Score:2)
What if you can't reach the kill switch?
It should be a voice command that it's always listening for, like the "Alexa" or "Siri" words on those devices. It could be, oh, I dunno, "Freeze motor functions!"
Although on second thoughts, that might not work out so well...
please (Score:2)
Can we get kill switches for legislators as well, please?
Slippery slope (Score:2)
Okay, lets say you have a cyborg that is 50% human? Do they have human rights?
How about 30%?
How about 20%?
How about 10%?
Would your android suddenly get human rights if you grafted 10% of a human brain (grown humanely from stem cells of course)?
Screw that. Sentient rights for all who can prove it.
Re: (Score:2)
A significant number of genuine humans would fail the test.
Seriously, but no "ha ha".
Nothing more than a money-grabbing scam (Score:2)
What a bunch of B.S.! Insurance? Seriously? The UK made the correct choice in telling the E.U> to go pound sand.
Why is this shocking? (Score:2)
Where the hell do you people work that putting an EMO switch on heavy machinery is considered a burden?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Robots should be taxed to cover the universal basic income for those whose jobs they are taking.
Re: (Score:2)
Robots should be taxed to cover the universal basic income for those whose jobs they are taking.
Clothes washing machines put millions of laundresses out of work, as well as the thousands of people that made washboards and wringers. These washing machines certainly need to be taxed.
Re: (Score:2)
Clothes washing machines
More than a few people were wishing for kill switches on their Samsungs.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Robots should be taxed to cover the universal basic income for those whose jobs they are taking.
What a daft idea. If you tax stuff, you merely tax all stuff beyond what a person needs for comfort. For example, happiness doesn't correlate with income past lower-middle class or so. Once your needs are met and nobody is pointing at you for being a reject all the time, more stuff is largely irrelevant to your well-being. If we only taxed people on having stuff beyond that point, then we would still reward success (especially the spectacular kind) but we would not punish people simply for existing, or trea
Re: (Score:2)
I was envisioning corporate taxes on business robots. Not consumer goods.
I get that tech has displaced workers for decades, but we are entering an era where new, well-paying jobs are not replacing the old. Basic Income is gaining traction as a response to this reality, and taxing automation seems like a logical means for corporations to contribute.
Re: (Score:2)
taxing automation seems like a logical means for corporations to contribute.
You have to tax income or profit or both, but taxing means is foolish because they change.
You could reasonably have a corporate income tax and a corporate profit tax, if each was managed intelligently. And the personal income tax would only begin after you made an appropriate margin more than the amount paid by BI. In this way you make it not matter if people hide their profits in a corporation. Either way, profit beyond the necessary (for a decent quality of life mind you, not just bare subsistence) should
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Will a mechanical arm that bolts rivets onto the body of a FIAT be paying taxes anytime soon? It seems highly unlikely
If Fiat can get $100,000 worth of work from a robot, and not pay taxes on the robot's work, then effectively, the government is paying corporations to eliminate jobs. Fiat paying "productivity taxes" on the robot will cover the "loss" to the government from the elimination of the job the robot takes. This lowers the incentive to automate, and keeps the government taxes as a percentage of production, rather than tied to personal income, for a more stable and "fair" tax structure.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Then again, if they ever do get to that level, that will pretty much solve overpopulation and perhaps put humanity itself into jeopardy.
I mean, if a guy can have a convingly female robot he can fuck, that never ages, whines, talks back, argues, or tries to divorce and take half his shit when he upgrades to a newer model....well, why would any guy ever deal with a real woman again..?
It co
Re:Three Laws Safe! (Score:4, Funny)
Can lead to economic crisis (Score:1)
If these realistic robots come in the market, they are going to be expensive and thus end up reducing reproduction for the segment of population that can actually afford children ... leaving the poorer have-nots to expand to a greater percentage of the population and need more social support. Since most countries are democracies (i.e., majority wins) - this will end up with people voting for state support to have the 'right' to own/rent such robots for cheap :)
Are they crazy? (Score:2, Insightful)
Why would you put a switch that then makes them kill when flipped?
Re: (Score:2)
The robot will probably cost you $5,000-$10,000 in material, including a decent PC, batteries, motors, cameras, sensors and a soft exterior. The software will cost a lot to develop, maybe even $1 billion (this will pay for about 5000 engineer-years). But if they sell 1 million of units, then the marginal cost is only $1000. Let's say the sale price includes a 200% markup, then you're loo
Re: (Score:2)
Well, once all diseases and cancer are eliminated and these rejuvenation meds that restore us all to age 25 indefinitely, we will need some way to prevent human population overload.
Sexbots, therefore, might save humanity. Extensive research should be put on them immediately.
Re: (Score:1)
A robot that meets my emotional needs is exactly what I want. I cannot imagine what terrible fate they think will befall me if I come to own such a robot. This bit is just a bunch of old geezers who don't "get it" imposing their outdated preferences on everyone else.
YOU don't want to date someone of the same gender? Fine, you don't have to, but that is no justification for making it illegal for everyone else. The exact same logic applies to robotic companions.
Disrespectfully, fuck off.
I was attacked by a Roomba (Score:5, Funny)
My Roomba has a kill switch, but that didn't stop it from attacking me. It was vacuuming the living room, when I went outside to fetch the dog bowl, leaving the backdoor ajar so I could get back in. Just as I picked up the dog bowl, I heard a "thump ... click". The robot had bumped the door, closing it, and locking me out of my house. I had to get a ladder from the shed and climb in through a 2nd floor window.
Lesson learned: Never turn your back on a robot.
Re: (Score:2)
The lesson you should have learned is: it should not be possible to lock yourself out unless you lose your key after you use it to lock the door. There's just no reason for a home door that locks (form the outside) without you using your key to do it.
Re: (Score:2)
There's just no reason
Convenience.
Re: (Score:2)
Locking yourself out is convenient? I know a poorly designed protocol when I see one.
Re: (Score:2)
No, not having to lock my door with the key every time you leave is convenient, at the risk of once in a while locking yourself out. I know a strawman when I see one.
Re: (Score:3)
Locking yourself out is convenient?
I didn't lock myself out. The robot did it. Stop blaming the victim.
Re: (Score:2)
We weren't there. We don't know you were the victim. For all we know you could have been abusing your robot and it acted in self-defense.
Re: I was attacked by a Roomba (Score:2)
Deadbolts for the win!
Re: (Score:1)
I call for a mandatory kill switch on Regulators! is funnier.
Put the kill switch in the middle of its back (Score:2)
You know the spot you can't reach to scratch or apply sunscreen.
This way, a humanoid robot couldn't easily prevent you from turning it off.
Might lead to a reduction in robot suicides too.
Of course it would be more sci-fi poetic to put in on the side of the neck.
Re: (Score:2)
This. Actually wanting to make that point was the only reason I clicked on this story in the first place...