Robots, Consciousness and Rights <http://omnikool.discovery.com/RealMedia/ads/click_lx.ads/news.discovery.com/tech/robots-consciousness-and-rights.html/1342634297/Top3/default/empty.gif/535066614230786455654941414a4e67?x> <http://news.discovery.com/contributors/jonathan-strickland/> Analysis by Jonathan Strickland <http://news.discovery.com/contributors/jonathan-strickland/> Mon Mar 22, 2010 10:13 AM ET 39 Comments<http://news.discovery.com/tech/robots-consciousness-and-rights.html#view-comments>| Leave a Comment<http://news.discovery.com/tech/robots-consciousness-and-rights.html#post-a-comment> Print<http://news.discovery.com/tech/robots-consciousness-and-rights.html?print=true> Email <javascript:%20void(null);>
- Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/share.php?u=http://news.discovery.com/tech/robots-consciousness-and-rights.html> - Twitter<http://wd.sharethis.com/api/sharer.php?destination=twitter&url=http://news.discovery.com/tech/robots-consciousness-and-rights.html&title=Robots,%20Consciousness%20and%20Rights%20:%20Discovery%20News> - Digg<http://digg.com/submit?url=http://news.discovery.com/tech/robots-consciousness-and-rights.html&title=Robots,%20Consciousness%20and%20Rights%20:%20Discovery%20News&bodytext=Recently,%20I%27ve%20been%20researching%20artificial%20intelligence%20and%20consciousness%20for%20HowStuffWorks.com.%20While%20exploring%20the%20possibilities%20of%20machines%20with%20&topic=television> - Yahoo! Buzz<http://buzz.yahoo.com/buzz?publisherurn=discovery_cha79&targetUrl=http://news.discovery.com/tech/robots-consciousness-and-rights.html&submitHeadline=Robots,%20Consciousness%20and%20Rights%20:%20Discovery%20News> [image: Deep-blue-1]<http://blogs.discovery.com/.a/6a00d8341bf67c53ef01310fc9c22e970c-pi>Recently, I've been researching artificial intelligence and consciousness for HowStuffWorks.com <http://www.howstuffworks.com/>. While exploring the possibilities of machines with self-awareness, I'm drawn to the debate about whether an artificially intelligent construct has the same rights as a biological entity. In other words, if we built a robot or computer that could seemingly think on its own and was aware of its own existence, should we give it the same rights and privileges we have as humans? The question itself may be moot. Our own understanding of the human brain is still limited. While some scientists and doctors are working on building a computer simulation of the brain, they're doing so without knowing all the details of how the brain works. It's like finding a mysterious machine and then reconstructing it without actually understanding what makes it tick. It may be impossible for us to create a machine capable of real thought and self-awareness. To make the debate even more complicated, there's no way to know if machine consciousness would resemble human consciousness. When it comes to the conscious mind, we have a very small sample size from which we can extrapolate. While a machine brain would be the product of human ingenuity (or possibly the product of another machine that was itself the product of human ingenuity), it's impossible to know right now if a conscious, thinking machine would have an intelligence comparable to ours. Would it experience emotion (simulated or otherwise)? Would it come to the conclusion that people are at best a messy threat that should be eliminated? Or would it just process the tasks we give it and never think beyond those parameters? There are dozens of science fiction stories that deal with machine consciousness and the ethical dilemmas that follow. There are doomsday tales that suggest machines will rise up against biological entities. There's Kurzweil's theory of the singularity<http://www.howstuffworks.com/technological-singularity.htm>, one version of which sees humans and machines merging together to create a new species beyond our imaginations. And there's the movie A.I., in which the audience feels empathy for a synthetic creature that possesses an intelligence and awareness that it doesn't understand. Are any of these futures likely? I once participated in an alternate reality game (ARG) in which the players were given the task of voting to bestow or deny basic rights to thinking machines. My philosophy is that creating a machine that can think isn't a great idea. It makes sense to build machines that are good at what they do but I don't see the need to design thinking versions. I certainly don't need my toaster outsmarting me on a daily basis. I voted against giving machines rights, though at that point it's really too late. What are the right questions to ask about artificial consciousness? And do you think we'll ever reach a point where we can create a truly conscious machine? We've seen Deep Blue defeat chess master Kasparov<http://www.research.ibm.com/deepblue/>. We've also seen a computer at Cornell<http://www.news.cornell.edu/stories/April09/NaturalLaws.ws.html>extrapolate the basic laws of physics by observing a swinging pendulum. How far are we from hearing a computer telling us what's on its mind? *Image from AP Photo/Adam Nadel* -- Celebrating 10 years of bringing diversity to perversity! Mahogany at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahogany_pleasures_of_darkness/
