|
General Robotics Forum - All aspects of robots and their applications.
|
|
|
|
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
|
Posted by Too_Many_Tools on December 9, 2009, 1:30 am
Your thoughts?
TMT
Scientists, lawyers mull effects of home robots
Posted: Dec 05, 2009 9:43 AM CST
By BROOKE DONALD
Associated Press Writer
PALO ALTO, Calif. (AP) - Eric Horvitz illustrates the potential
dilemmas of living with robots by telling the story of how he once got
stuck in an elevator at Stanford Hospital with a droid the size of a
washing machine.
"I remembered thinking, 'Whoa, this is scary,' as it whirled around,
almost knocking me down," the Microsoft researcher recalled. "Then, I
thought, 'What if I were a patient?' There could be big issues here."
We're still far from the sci-fi dream of having robots whirring about
and catering to our every need. But little by little, we'll be sharing
more of our space with robots in the next decade, as prices drop and
new technology creates specialized machines that clean up spilled milk
or even provide comfort foran elderly parent.
Now scientists and legal scholars are exploring the likely effects.
What happens if a robot crushes your foot, chases your cat off a ledge
or smacks your baby? While experts don't expect a band of Terminators
to attack or a "2001: A Space Odyssey" computer that takes control,
even simpler, benign robots will have legal, social and ethical
consequences.
"As we rely more and more on automated systems, we have to think of
the implications. It is part of being a responsible scientist,"
Horvitz said.
Horvitz assembled a team of scientists this year when he was president
of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence and
asked them to explore the future of human-robot interactions. A report
on their discussions is due next year.
For years, robots have been used outside the home. They detect bombs
on the battleground, build cars in factories and deliver supplies and
visit patients in hospitals.
But the past few years have seen the rise of home robots. Mainly they
are used for tasks like vacuuming (think Roomba). There are also
robotic lawn mowers, duct cleaners, surveillance systems and alarm
clocks. There are robotic toys for entertainment, such as Furby.
Robotic companions, like Paro the harbor seal, comfort the elderly. By
2015, personal robot sales in the U.S. will exceed $5 billion, more
than quadrupling what they are now, according to ABI Research, which
analyzes technology trends.
"You won't see Rosie from 'The Jetsons,' but you're going to see more
and more robots that help maintain your home. They'll pick up stuff
off the floor, stock your fridge, carry stuff from the car," said
Colin Angle, CEO of iRobot Corp., which makes the Roomba.
As such 'bots become more sophisticated, they could complicate
questions about product liability. Ryan Calo, a fellow with Stanford's
Center for Internet and Society, pointed out in a recent panel
discussion at Stanford Law School that the original manufacturer might
not always be liable if a robot went haywire.
"Robots are not just things the manufacturer builds and you go out and
use them in a specific way. Robots can often be instructed, they can
be programmed, you can have software that is built upon by others," he
said.
There are no laws in the U.S. specifically governing robots, and
discussion of them usually leads to science fiction writer Isaac
Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics, which debuted in his 1942 short story
"Runaround."
The first of Asimov's laws is that robots should do no harm. It's also
one of the biggest considerations when manufacturing the next
generation of personal robots.
"If a robot becomes increasingly autonomous and can make its own
decisions, what happens if the robot does not carry out the exact
wishes of the person?" said George Bekey, a robotics researcher and
professor emeritus at University of Southern California.
As robots interact more closely with people, the bonds some people
form with the machines - even ones that do not look like humans -
might need to be considered.
Shoppers personalize their Roombas, naming and decorating them, for
example. Angle recalled an incident when a soldier plucked a banged-up
military robot nicknamed Scooby from an Iraqi battlefield and carried
it to a depot to be fixed.
"It's doing you a service, you're going to get attached to it," Angle
said.
Ronald Arkin teaches a course on robots and society at Georgia Tech
and directs the school's Mobile Robot Laboratory. His most recent book
is titled "Governing Lethal Behavior in Autonomous Robots."
"There needs to be ethics embedded in the systems," he said. "It's not
just making a system that assists someone. It's making a system that
interacts with someone in a way that respects their dignity."
Horvitz said his panel will recommend more research into the
psychological reactions humans have to robotic systems. The group, he
said, also suggests machines be designed with the ability to explain
their reasoning to humans.
While ethicists, lawyers and roboticists ponder how to best integrate
humans and autonomous machines, there is some evidence that a balance
is already beginning to be struck.
After returning to the Stanford hospital on another occasion, Horvitz
noticed a sign hanging above the spot where he had his harrowing
experience. It read: "Please Do Not Board The Elevator With The
Robot."
___
On the Net:
AAAI: http://www.aaai.org/home.html
Stanford Law School Center for Internet and Society: http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
|
|
Posted by Too_Many_Tools on December 15, 2009, 2:02 pm
> Your thoughts?
> TMT
> Scientists, lawyers mull effects of home robots
> Posted: Dec 05, 2009 9:43 AM CST
> =A0By BROOKE DONALD
> Associated Press Writer
> PALO ALTO, Calif. (AP) - Eric Horvitz illustrates the potential
> dilemmas of living with robots by telling the story of how he once got
> stuck in an elevator at Stanford Hospital with a droid the size of a
> washing machine.
> "I remembered thinking, 'Whoa, this is scary,' as it whirled around,
> almost knocking me down," the Microsoft researcher recalled. "Then, I
> thought, 'What if I were a patient?' There could be big issues here."
> We're still far from the sci-fi dream of having robots whirring about
> and catering to our every need. But little by little, we'll be sharing
> more of our space with robots in the next decade, as prices drop and
> new technology creates specialized machines that clean up spilled milk
> or even provide comfort foran elderly parent.
> Now scientists and legal scholars are exploring the likely effects.
> What happens if a robot crushes your foot, chases your cat off a ledge
> or smacks your baby? While experts don't expect a band of Terminators
> to attack or a "2001: A Space Odyssey" computer that takes control,
> even simpler, benign robots will have legal, social and ethical
> consequences.
> "As we rely more and more on automated systems, we have to think of
> the implications. It is part of being a responsible scientist,"
> Horvitz said.
> Horvitz assembled a team of scientists this year when he was president
> of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence and
> asked them to explore the future of human-robot interactions. A report
> on their discussions is due next year.
> For years, robots have been used outside the home. They detect bombs
> on the battleground, build cars in factories and deliver supplies and
> visit patients in hospitals.
> But the past few years have seen the rise of home robots. Mainly they
> are used for tasks like vacuuming (think Roomba). There are also
> robotic lawn mowers, duct cleaners, surveillance systems and alarm
> clocks. There are robotic toys for entertainment, such as Furby.
> Robotic companions, like Paro the harbor seal, comfort the elderly. By
> 2015, personal robot sales in the U.S. will exceed $5 billion, more
> than quadrupling what they are now, according to ABI Research, which
> analyzes technology trends.
> "You won't see Rosie from 'The Jetsons,' but you're going to see more
> and more robots that help maintain your home. They'll pick up stuff
> off the floor, stock your fridge, carry stuff from the car," said
> Colin Angle, CEO of iRobot Corp., which makes the Roomba.
> As such 'bots become more sophisticated, they could complicate
> questions about product liability. Ryan Calo, a fellow with Stanford's
> Center for Internet and Society, pointed out in a recent panel
> discussion at Stanford Law School that the original manufacturer might
> not always be liable if a robot went haywire.
> "Robots are not just things the manufacturer builds and you go out and
> use them in a specific way. Robots can often be instructed, they can
> be programmed, you can have software that is built upon by others," he
> said.
> There are no laws in the U.S. specifically governing robots, and
> discussion of them usually leads to science fiction writer Isaac
> Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics, which debuted in his 1942 short story
> "Runaround."
> The first of Asimov's laws is that robots should do no harm. It's also
> one of the biggest considerations when manufacturing the next
> generation of personal robots.
> "If a robot becomes increasingly autonomous and can make its own
> decisions, what happens if the robot does not carry out the exact
> wishes of the person?" said George Bekey, a robotics researcher and
> professor emeritus at University of Southern California.
> As robots interact more closely with people, the bonds some people
> form with the machines - even ones that do not look like humans -
> might need to be considered.
> Shoppers personalize their Roombas, naming and decorating them, for
> example. Angle recalled an incident when a soldier plucked a banged-up
> military robot nicknamed Scooby from an Iraqi battlefield and carried
> it to a depot to be fixed.
> "It's doing you a service, you're going to get attached to it," Angle
> said.
> Ronald Arkin teaches a course on robots and society at Georgia Tech
> and directs the school's Mobile Robot Laboratory. His most recent book
> is titled "Governing Lethal Behavior in Autonomous Robots."
> "There needs to be ethics embedded in the systems," he said. "It's not
> just making a system that assists someone. It's making a system that
> interacts with someone in a way that respects their dignity."
> Horvitz said his panel will recommend more research into the
> psychological reactions humans have to robotic systems. The group, he
> said, also suggests machines be designed with the ability to explain
> their reasoning to humans.
> While ethicists, lawyers and roboticists ponder how to best integrate
> humans and autonomous machines, there is some evidence that a balance
> is already beginning to be struck.
> After returning to the Stanford hospital on another occasion, Horvitz
> noticed a sign hanging above the spot where he had his harrowing
> experience. It read: "Please Do Not Board The Elevator With The
> Robot."
> ___
> On the Net:
> AAAI:http://www.aaai.org/home.html
> Stanford Law School Center for Internet and Society:http://cyberlaw.stanf=
ord.edu
> Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
Not one comment?
TMT
|
|
Posted by Curt Welch on December 16, 2009, 8:02 pm
> > Your thoughts?
> > TMT
> > Scientists, lawyers mull effects of home robots
> > Posted: Dec 05, 2009 9:43 AM CST
> > =A0By BROOKE DONALD
> > Associated Press Writer
> > PALO ALTO, Calif. (AP) - Eric Horvitz illustrates the potential
> > dilemmas of living with robots by telling the story of how he once got
> > stuck in an elevator at Stanford Hospital with a droid the size of a
> > washing machine.
> > "I remembered thinking, 'Whoa, this is scary,' as it whirled around,
> > almost knocking me down," the Microsoft researcher recalled. "Then, I
> > thought, 'What if I were a patient?' There could be big issues here."
> > We're still far from the sci-fi dream of having robots whirring about
> > and catering to our every need. But little by little, we'll be sharing
> > more of our space with robots in the next decade, as prices drop and
> > new technology creates specialized machines that clean up spilled milk
> > or even provide comfort foran elderly parent.
> > Now scientists and legal scholars are exploring the likely effects.
> > What happens if a robot crushes your foot, chases your cat off a ledge
> > or smacks your baby? While experts don't expect a band of Terminators
> > to attack or a "2001: A Space Odyssey" computer that takes control,
> > even simpler, benign robots will have legal, social and ethical
> > consequences.
> > "As we rely more and more on automated systems, we have to think of
> > the implications. It is part of being a responsible scientist,"
> > Horvitz said.
> > Horvitz assembled a team of scientists this year when he was president
> > of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence and
> > asked them to explore the future of human-robot interactions. A report
> > on their discussions is due next year.
> > For years, robots have been used outside the home. They detect bombs
> > on the battleground, build cars in factories and deliver supplies and
> > visit patients in hospitals.
> > But the past few years have seen the rise of home robots. Mainly they
> > are used for tasks like vacuuming (think Roomba). There are also
> > robotic lawn mowers, duct cleaners, surveillance systems and alarm
> > clocks. There are robotic toys for entertainment, such as Furby.
> > Robotic companions, like Paro the harbor seal, comfort the elderly. By
> > 2015, personal robot sales in the U.S. will exceed $5 billion, more
> > than quadrupling what they are now, according to ABI Research, which
> > analyzes technology trends.
> > "You won't see Rosie from 'The Jetsons,' but you're going to see more
> > and more robots that help maintain your home. They'll pick up stuff
> > off the floor, stock your fridge, carry stuff from the car," said
> > Colin Angle, CEO of iRobot Corp., which makes the Roomba.
> > As such 'bots become more sophisticated, they could complicate
> > questions about product liability. Ryan Calo, a fellow with Stanford's
> > Center for Internet and Society, pointed out in a recent panel
> > discussion at Stanford Law School that the original manufacturer might
> > not always be liable if a robot went haywire.
> > "Robots are not just things the manufacturer builds and you go out and
> > use them in a specific way. Robots can often be instructed, they can
> > be programmed, you can have software that is built upon by others," he
> > said.
> > There are no laws in the U.S. specifically governing robots, and
> > discussion of them usually leads to science fiction writer Isaac
> > Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics, which debuted in his 1942 short story
> > "Runaround."
> > The first of Asimov's laws is that robots should do no harm. It's also
> > one of the biggest considerations when manufacturing the next
> > generation of personal robots.
> > "If a robot becomes increasingly autonomous and can make its own
> > decisions, what happens if the robot does not carry out the exact
> > wishes of the person?" said George Bekey, a robotics researcher and
> > professor emeritus at University of Southern California.
> > As robots interact more closely with people, the bonds some people
> > form with the machines - even ones that do not look like humans -
> > might need to be considered.
> > Shoppers personalize their Roombas, naming and decorating them, for
> > example. Angle recalled an incident when a soldier plucked a banged-up
> > military robot nicknamed Scooby from an Iraqi battlefield and carried
> > it to a depot to be fixed.
> > "It's doing you a service, you're going to get attached to it," Angle
> > said.
> > Ronald Arkin teaches a course on robots and society at Georgia Tech
> > and directs the school's Mobile Robot Laboratory. His most recent book
> > is titled "Governing Lethal Behavior in Autonomous Robots."
> > "There needs to be ethics embedded in the systems," he said. "It's not
> > just making a system that assists someone. It's making a system that
> > interacts with someone in a way that respects their dignity."
> > Horvitz said his panel will recommend more research into the
> > psychological reactions humans have to robotic systems. The group, he
> > said, also suggests machines be designed with the ability to explain
> > their reasoning to humans.
> > While ethicists, lawyers and roboticists ponder how to best integrate
> > humans and autonomous machines, there is some evidence that a balance
> > is already beginning to be struck.
> > After returning to the Stanford hospital on another occasion, Horvitz
> > noticed a sign hanging above the spot where he had his harrowing
> > experience. It read: "Please Do Not Board The Elevator With The
> > Robot."
> > ___
> > On the Net:
> > AAAI:http://www.aaai.org/home.html
> > Stanford Law School Center for Internet and
> > Society:http://cyberlaw.stanf=
> ord.edu
> > Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
> Not one comment?
> TMT
Love the elevator-driod side-story (WARNING - beware of robots!).
Don't really care much about the rest. :)
--
Curt Welch http://CurtWelch.Com/
curt@kcwc.com http://NewsReader.Com/
|
|
Posted by DA on December 22, 2009, 11:54 am
DA had written this in response to
http://www.www.roboticscommunity.com/robotics/Scientists-lawyers-mull-effects-of-home-robots-28343-.htm
:
Too_Many_Tools wrote:
> Your thoughts?
> After returning to the Stanford hospital on another occasion, Horvitz
> noticed a sign hanging above the spot where he had his harrowing
> experience. It read: "Please Do Not Board The Elevator With The
> Robot."
Who would design a robot for hospital use that does not recognize a warm
human body to avoid bumping into it? You'd think it's the most basic
design requirement for the intended environment. Besides, the elevator
doors should have been light-walled (Roomba style perhaps) so the robot
can't get in in the first place. Both seem like human shortcomings, not
the robot's. Indeed, even if someone gets killed by a robot, it is in the
end a human's fault. Not necessarily the victim's but either
designer's/manufacturer's/operator's or, yes, victim's own. If you dig
deep enough you'll find a responsible human. Just like with a car or, as
NRA like to stress, a gun.
I don't know about civic laws but at least a special chapter in NEC for
robots in human environments is in order if the acceptance of personal
robots is to reach the numbers noted in the article. I would just point
out that you could just easily read same acceptance projections in a 1985
"Robotics Age" magazine yet 25 years later we are still far from there.
##-----------------------------------------------##
Delivered via
http://www.roboticscommunity.com/
Web and RSS access to your favorite newsgroup
-
comp.robotics.misc - 12761 messages and counting!
##-----------------------------------------------##
|
|
Posted by Curt Welch on December 22, 2009, 4:02 pm
info_at_air-space_dot_us@foo.com (DA) wrote:
> DA had written this in response to
> http://www.www.roboticscommunity.com/robotics/Scientists-lawyers-mull-eff
> ects-of-home-robots-28343-.htm
> :
> Too_Many_Tools wrote:
> > Your thoughts?
> > After returning to the Stanford hospital on another occasion, Horvitz
> > noticed a sign hanging above the spot where he had his harrowing
> > experience. It read: "Please Do Not Board The Elevator With The
> > Robot."
> Who would design a robot for hospital use that does not recognize a warm
> human body to avoid bumping into it?
I'm sure they did. Or at least, made it fairly harmless such as by a low
power drive system and no sharp or dangerous edges or arms.
> You'd think it's the most basic
> design requirement for the intended environment. Besides, the elevator
> doors should have been light-walled (Roomba style perhaps) so the robot
> can't get in in the first place.
It seemed to me that the robot was probably meant to ride the elevator
instead of it being an accident.
My assumption was simply that the human was intimidated by being in the
small inclined space with what was probably a large robot. It didn't say
the human was actually harmed as I remember or at risk. The sign they put
up could simply have been in response to the fear the robot was creating
for people - vs any real harm or risk.
> Both seem like human shortcomings, not
> the robot's. Indeed, even if someone gets killed by a robot, it is in the
> end a human's fault. Not necessarily the victim's but either
> designer's/manufacturer's/operator's or, yes, victim's own. If you dig
> deep enough you'll find a responsible human. Just like with a car or, as
> NRA like to stress, a gun.
> I don't know about civic laws but at least a special chapter in NEC for
> robots in human environments is in order if the acceptance of personal
> robots is to reach the numbers noted in the article. I would just point
> out that you could just easily read same acceptance projections in a 1985
> "Robotics Age" magazine yet 25 years later we are still far from there.
Yeah, to all that. Which is why I found the article to be of no particular
merit. The problem of designing machines so they don't pose an unjustified
risk to human health is nothing new that just showed up with the invention
of robots. It's the same issue we have had to deal with since the
invention of the wheel. If you are designing _any_ machine and not
considering, and adjusting your design, to deal with that risk, then you
shouldn't be doing even basic engineering.
--
Curt Welch http://CurtWelch.Com/
curt@kcwc.com http://NewsReader.Com/
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | New Home Robots web site | February 19, 2008, 11:15 pm |
| 6 S's of Capable Home Robots | February 21, 2009, 11:45 pm |
| Sound effects from microcontroller pin using PWM | May 13, 2009, 11:13 am |
| ASU Scientists Keep an Eye on Martian Dust Storm | July 12, 2007, 11:23 am |
| Home build RDF (Radio Direction Finder) for indoor-outdoor mobile robots | March 24, 2007, 5:12 am |
| CFP: IMECS 2006 (International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists) | January 21, 2006, 5:39 am |
| Call for Papers: The International MultiConference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2006 | January 1, 2006, 5:34 am |
| "ROBOTS.PRO" domain name auction on EBay *now* (http://robots.pro) | September 22, 2008, 12:04 am |
| Home-Made Computers | February 13, 2006, 1:25 am |
| Wholesale to Home 10492 | January 29, 2008, 10:38 am |
|
|
|
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML site map
> TMT
> Scientists, lawyers mull effects of home robots
> Posted: Dec 05, 2009 9:43 AM CST
> =A0By BROOKE DONALD
> Associated Press Writer
> PALO ALTO, Calif. (AP) - Eric Horvitz illustrates the potential
> dilemmas of living with robots by telling the story of how he once got
> stuck in an elevator at Stanford Hospital with a droid the size of a
> washing machine.
> "I remembered thinking, 'Whoa, this is scary,' as it whirled around,
> almost knocking me down," the Microsoft researcher recalled. "Then, I
> thought, 'What if I were a patient?' There could be big issues here."
> We're still far from the sci-fi dream of having robots whirring about
> and catering to our every need. But little by little, we'll be sharing
> more of our space with robots in the next decade, as prices drop and
> new technology creates specialized machines that clean up spilled milk
> or even provide comfort foran elderly parent.
> Now scientists and legal scholars are exploring the likely effects.
> What happens if a robot crushes your foot, chases your cat off a ledge
> or smacks your baby? While experts don't expect a band of Terminators
> to attack or a "2001: A Space Odyssey" computer that takes control,
> even simpler, benign robots will have legal, social and ethical
> consequences.
> "As we rely more and more on automated systems, we have to think of
> the implications. It is part of being a responsible scientist,"
> Horvitz said.
> Horvitz assembled a team of scientists this year when he was president
> of the Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence and
> asked them to explore the future of human-robot interactions. A report
> on their discussions is due next year.
> For years, robots have been used outside the home. They detect bombs
> on the battleground, build cars in factories and deliver supplies and
> visit patients in hospitals.
> But the past few years have seen the rise of home robots. Mainly they
> are used for tasks like vacuuming (think Roomba). There are also
> robotic lawn mowers, duct cleaners, surveillance systems and alarm
> clocks. There are robotic toys for entertainment, such as Furby.
> Robotic companions, like Paro the harbor seal, comfort the elderly. By
> 2015, personal robot sales in the U.S. will exceed $5 billion, more
> than quadrupling what they are now, according to ABI Research, which
> analyzes technology trends.
> "You won't see Rosie from 'The Jetsons,' but you're going to see more
> and more robots that help maintain your home. They'll pick up stuff
> off the floor, stock your fridge, carry stuff from the car," said
> Colin Angle, CEO of iRobot Corp., which makes the Roomba.
> As such 'bots become more sophisticated, they could complicate
> questions about product liability. Ryan Calo, a fellow with Stanford's
> Center for Internet and Society, pointed out in a recent panel
> discussion at Stanford Law School that the original manufacturer might
> not always be liable if a robot went haywire.
> "Robots are not just things the manufacturer builds and you go out and
> use them in a specific way. Robots can often be instructed, they can
> be programmed, you can have software that is built upon by others," he
> said.
> There are no laws in the U.S. specifically governing robots, and
> discussion of them usually leads to science fiction writer Isaac
> Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics, which debuted in his 1942 short story
> "Runaround."
> The first of Asimov's laws is that robots should do no harm. It's also
> one of the biggest considerations when manufacturing the next
> generation of personal robots.
> "If a robot becomes increasingly autonomous and can make its own
> decisions, what happens if the robot does not carry out the exact
> wishes of the person?" said George Bekey, a robotics researcher and
> professor emeritus at University of Southern California.
> As robots interact more closely with people, the bonds some people
> form with the machines - even ones that do not look like humans -
> might need to be considered.
> Shoppers personalize their Roombas, naming and decorating them, for
> example. Angle recalled an incident when a soldier plucked a banged-up
> military robot nicknamed Scooby from an Iraqi battlefield and carried
> it to a depot to be fixed.
> "It's doing you a service, you're going to get attached to it," Angle
> said.
> Ronald Arkin teaches a course on robots and society at Georgia Tech
> and directs the school's Mobile Robot Laboratory. His most recent book
> is titled "Governing Lethal Behavior in Autonomous Robots."
> "There needs to be ethics embedded in the systems," he said. "It's not
> just making a system that assists someone. It's making a system that
> interacts with someone in a way that respects their dignity."
> Horvitz said his panel will recommend more research into the
> psychological reactions humans have to robotic systems. The group, he
> said, also suggests machines be designed with the ability to explain
> their reasoning to humans.
> While ethicists, lawyers and roboticists ponder how to best integrate
> humans and autonomous machines, there is some evidence that a balance
> is already beginning to be struck.
> After returning to the Stanford hospital on another occasion, Horvitz
> noticed a sign hanging above the spot where he had his harrowing
> experience. It read: "Please Do Not Board The Elevator With The
> Robot."
> ___
> On the Net:
> AAAI:http://www.aaai.org/home.html
> Stanford Law School Center for Internet and Society:http://cyberlaw.stanf=