Talk:Robot ethics

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): 201Student, Brandon carroll. Peer reviewers: 201Student, Brandon carroll.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2019 and 14 December 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Synchronicity333.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

How exactly does robotics by itself unify science and humanities?
"Robotics de facto unifies the so called two cultures, science and humanities..." I don't see how... explain your reasons to state that please. guessing that you wanted to say that "Roboethics unify..." instead of "Robotics unify..."?

Asimov?
How does this article get away with not mentioning Isaac Asimov's Three Laws which is the cornerstone of the entire subject of Roboethics? All work in this field is the result of discussion, criticism, modification or improvement (and even rejection) of Asimov's original ideas. Its like an article about gravity not mentioning Newton! Roger (talk) 12:59, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Asimov's laws are mostly about the ethical duties a robot has toward a human. That is the subject of 'machine ethics'. Roboethics is about the duties man has toward the robot. That was NOT the subject of Asimov's three laws except at the meta level (should we program the robot with the three laws?). The update to this article as confused this issue. Gorbag42 (talk) 22:03, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Attention needed

 * Include any missing info (esp Asimov, future etc.)
 * refs
 * check content
 * reassess after work done

Chaosdruid (talk) 05:24, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

External links not sufficiently relevant
This article has a large collection of external links relative to its length, and I think some of them are only tangentially relevant. I like the organizations, but I think they belong in other articles. In particular, I'd propose to remove at least these: The Centre for Responsible Nanotechnology, Union of Concerned Scientists, The International Institute of Humanitarian Law, Humanity+. Does anyone have objections? Brian Tomasik (talk) 07:43, 29 March 2014 (UTC)

In Popular Culture
I believe that in this section, something ought to be said about the recent Spike Jonze film "Her", and its relevance to the subject.--67.1.164.146 (talk) 02:15, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

I think Ex Machina(2015) from Alex Garland should be mentioned. It approaches the subject of this paper: Extending Legal Protection to Social Robots: The Effects of Anthropomorphism, Empathy, and Violent Behavior Towards Robotic Objects -Author: Kate Darling Eliezer.souzareis (talk) 06:14, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Robot ethics v. Roboethics
In reality, the terms roboethics and robot ethics have meant specifically different things. That is reflected in the intentions of the two groups with those names on FB. Roboethics has a closer relationship with philosophy and social science, among other things. It even reaches on that basis into public policy. Robot ethics is a term that's referred to the technical challenge of building ai ethics machines.

Should robots be able to feel pain?
Should robots be able to feel pain? Just granpa (talk) 15:52, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * How? – Epipelagic (talk) 08:17, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SU23 - Sect 200 - Thu
— Assignment last updated by York1210 (talk) 06:56, 24 July 2023 (UTC)