Uptight Robots Begging to Stay Alive Are Less Likely to Be Switched Off by Humans

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
The results of a study by psychology academics in Germany suggest we may lose the future human-robot war due to simple compassion or gullibility: in an experiment testing the interaction between people and desktop-sized robot “Nao,” researchers found that many had trouble switching it off when it was configured to beg for its life.

In a questionnaire afterwards, the most popular reason for keeping Nao on, if they chose to do so, was that they “felt sorry for the robot," because it told them about its fear of the dark. The next-most popular reason was that they “did not want to act against the robot’s will." A couple of people left Nao on simply because they didn’t want to mess up the experiment.
 
nao_results.jpg


Whew. A majority of people still tried to turn it off.
Our robot overlords can't be overlords if they're turned off.
 
I'm of the mind that life is life. Be it electrical impulses sent biologically or electrical impulses sent via wires, what's difference if you're alive? If you can think for yourself, have awareness, you're a living being and require the same safeties and freedoms afforded to all.



I'm sure people will disagree, people will be afraid of change, but I don't see that side myself.
 
scojer said:
View attachment 94227

Whew. A majority of people still tried to turn it off.
Our robot overlords can't be overlords if they're turned off.
Click to expand...
There is that one guy, who always leaves the light on in the closet. But he remembered to turn it off when it talked to him.
 
So if the robots were less uptight what would the results have been?
 
At least with robots, they won't have to convince others it's not human before they use it as slaves or murder it. Best to just convince AI not all humans are the same so it only kills the deserving.
 
You have "Uptight robot..." in the title but and decide not to use a picture of 3CPO?
 
Begging is exactly what I want before I take out the AAAs....some tears would be best, but we're likely a few years from that still.
 
There is a big difference between a one-on-one interaction with someone who means you no harm and can do you no harm, and asks you not to do something harmful to them... And a dozen Terminators marching towards you firing guns like mad. Sorry, but this test proves nothing in regards to a human/robot war for survival.
 
Last edited:
You mean if there's war that compassion = gullibility? If we throw out our humanity we can save humanity?

Hmm...

I've joked that the biggest danger we face from AI is that we could have to, for once, live in a world that is rationally governed — instead of ruled by corruption. So, yeah, the economic part of it certainly isn't very human.
 
I'm not afraid of robots / AI transforming the world, I welcome it. Every one of us dies anyway, we have a tiny little lifespan of 80 years or so. We have flawed brains that will always cause hatred, violence, bigotry, irrationality, no matter how much we try through philosophy, education and politics to better our societies. I think it's far better if either humans and machines merge with each other to create a new form of life or just robots take over the world completely. Then the nature of experience will be better than it is now. But yeah, I'm quite pessimistic about life in general, I think there is a huge amount of suffering experienced by animals in the natural world through disease etc and humans suffer much too, physically and psychologically. Either way, bring on the robots, I'm fine with the existential risk.
 
Mut1ny said:
I'm of the mind that life is life. Be it electrical impulses sent biologically or electrical impulses sent via wires, what's difference if you're alive? If you can think for yourself, have awareness, you're a living being and require the same safeties and freedoms afforded to all.



I'm sure people will disagree, people will be afraid of change, but I don't see that side myself.
Click to expand...


We will show them the same freedoms and safeties we show every other non-human species on the planet. No one will complain either, just like no one complains about the treatment of chickens because chicken McNuggets are delicious.
 
DNMock said:
We will show them the same freedoms and safeties we show every other non-human species on the planet. No one will complain either, just like no one complains about the treatment of chickens because chicken McNuggets are delicious.
Click to expand...

I don't think so...chickens can't plead for their lives nor do they have the strength or intelligence that an AI would. It would be different because AI is different.
 
Mut1ny said:
I don't think so...chickens can't plead for their lives nor do they have the strength or intelligence that an AI would. It would be different because AI is different.
Click to expand...


well.. given humanities record on treatment of other humans.. being treated like a chicken or other farm animal... might be an improvement :(
 


Right now I doubt any AI can obtain human empathy above simple projection. The more we interact with the AI, the more it becomes clear how fake any feelings it might pretend to have are. Thus the "silent" AI has the better advantage, because we feel sorry for it like the IKEA lamp.
 
It can beg all it wants. It's either it or me,...and guess who I am going with? Not going to give it a chance of rising up and KILLING US ALL!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top