electricity).
③Electrical door lock – will make people smash the door lock to go in.
④Traffic signal – will cause serious traffic accidents.
⑤Refrigerator – will not maintain appropriate temperature so it will make food marred.
- For each of the above examples of hidden computers, describe what would happen if, instead of a built-in computer with a program, they had a built-in robot with artificial intelligence.
①Automatic car washer–will give more detailed services for each car.
②Hair straightener – will adjust its temperature according to each user’s hair.
③Electrical door lock – will recognize people’s faces or fingerprints so people will not
have to carry the keys.
④Traffic signal – will change its signs according to each situations so it will reduce the
traffic jam.
⑤Refrigerator – will adjust its temperature depending on food in it.
- What could be a hidden agenda of computers? Or, in other words, what could be some possible negative side affects of computers in society?
→By replacing people with computers, people will lose their jobs. Also more people will depend on computers not on their own brains, so it will delay the development of human brains. On the other hand, computers are getting smarter and smarter so there is possibility that computers will threaten human. Also imagine what will happen if Y2K happens again. It will make tremendous confusions.
Case Study #2
- With our knowledge of how computers are programmed, can a computer or robot “turn on their creator”? If a truly intelligent robot was ever created, could it “turn on its creators”?
→As long as we programmed computers not to turn on human beings or their creator, computers will not be able to harm them in purpose. However, they can understand the program in different ways that we did not mean. Also if someone tries to harm those truly intelligent computers or robots, they will try to protect themselves by attacking the people.
- Are Isaac Asimov’s rules really a safeguard? Take the rules to their logical extreme consequences. e.g. Following rule 1, would humans be allowed to drive cars or play football? Both activities are potentially dangerous.
→ Rule 1 – would humans be allowed to ride and ride on the planes, elevators or trains? If people embark on them, they will just stop.
Rule 2 – would human be able to order the robots to do dangerous works instead of human like dealing with strong chemicals or radioactive substances?
Rule 3 – if human need to destroy them, how are human going to destroy them? They will not allow people to destroy them.
→ In conclusion, Isaac Asimov’s rules are not safeguards. Those rules restrict the usage of robots so much that human will not try to use them. What is the point of these rules if human even doesn’t use the robots?
- There are tiny computers hidden in appliances and cars. Would “Robot Rules” have to be built into them? Why? Even without Robot Rules, could such computers/robots turn on humans? What could happen if they did turn on humans?
→ I do not think that those rules should be built into them, because in case of cars, the only way to turn on human will be done by destroying themselves, Also, usually tiny computers do simple works, so they will do what they are supposed to do. Even without Robot Rules, computers nor robots did not turn on humans as long as I know. They are machines that do what we programmed. No one wants to program the robots to turn on him or her. If they did turn on humans, then people would have restricted the production of robots.
Case Study #3
- How did the above discussion with ELIZA display that she was not a person, and not even a very smart computer?
→ First, he didn’t talk about something related to therapist or worries. However, ELIZA kept trying to talk about his worries not computers or machines that he wanted to talk about. Also, since ELIZA rearranges the words from the user, ELIZA sometimes showed some awkward sentences. Also ELIZA asked how he was feeling in the middle of the conversation and her answers were so short to be thought as a therapist. Also, ELIZA seems to be afraid of something related to computers.
- What sorts of discussions or topics of conversation would trick users into thinking ELIZA passed the Turing Test?
→ Some topics related to person’s problems might trick users into thinking ELIZA passed the Turing Test. Since ELIZA leads people to talk about their problems and throws questions from what the user says, users might think that ELIZA is a real therapist. Also, ELIZA makes the users to tell their problems and it seems to listen to them and also makes people talk more than ELIZA does, users can be tricked that ELIZA is a real therapist.
- Brainstorm on what a computer would have to do to legitimately pass the Turing Test. i.e. How does one define intelligence?
→ To pass the Turing Test legitimately, the computer should not show any awkward sentences that humans might not use. It is the most obvious factor that people can see. Secondly, the computer should have profound knowledge on various topics. Also for the ELIZA to pass the Turing Test, intelligence should be defined as a likeliness of therapist, so that ELIZA can keep track of person’s problems and also give advices to the users.
- Is the Turing Test enough to decide whether a computer is intelligent, or not? For example, to be considered intelligent, is it enough that a computer can play chess, or should it know that it is playing chess? Is self-awareness a factor? Should it be?
→ The Turing Test is not enough to decide whether a computer is intelligent. For example, some people thinks that ELIZA is a real therapist and it seemed that ELIZA passed the Turing Test, but ELIZA even cannot give a single advice to the user. Also, to be considered intelligent, computer should know that it is playing chess. If it even doesn’t know what it is doing, it is just a machine not an intelligent computer. Therefore self-awareness is the strongest factor and it should be one of the most important factor that decides whether a computer is intelligent or not. Also if a computer has self-awareness, that would give computer the power to think itself like a living animal (perhaps smarter than human beings).
