We assign too much humanity to robots: They’re simply tools
Robots are a direct result of humans, so stop giving them so much slack
Social tendencies
While this may sound like the beginnings of aBlack Mirrorepisode, this tendency is precisely what allows us to enjoy social interactions with robots and place them in caregiver, collaborator, or companion roles.
The positive aspects of treating a robot like a person is precisely why roboticists design them as such — we like interacting with people. As these technologies become more human-like, they become more capable of influencing us. However, if we continue to follow the current path of robot and AI deployment, these technologies could emerge as far more dystopian than utopian.
The Sophia robot, manufactured by Hanson Robotics, has been on60 Minutes, receivedhonorary citizenship from Saudi Arabia, holds atitle from the United Nations, and has gone on adate with actor Will Smith. While Sophia undoubtedly highlights many technological advancements, few surpass Hanson’s achievements in marketing. If Sophia truly were a person, we would acknowledge its role as aninfluencer.
However, worse than robots or AI beingsociopathic agents— goal-oriented without morality or human judgment — these technologies become tools of mass influence for whichever organization or individual controls them.
If you thought theCambridge Analytica scandalwas bad, imagine what Facebook’s algorithms of influence could do if they had an accompanying, human-like face. Or a thousand faces. Or a million. The truevalue of a persuasive technologyis not in its cold, calculated efficiency, but its scale.
Seeing through intent
Recent scandals and exposures in the tech world have left many of us feeling helpless against these corporate giants. Fortunately,many of these issues can be solved through transparency.
There are fundamental questions that are important for social technologies to answer because we would expect the same answers when interacting with another person, albeit often implicitly. Who owns or sets the mandate of this technology? What are its objectives? What approaches can it use? What data can it access?
Since robots could have the potential to soonleverage superhuman capabilities, enacting the will of an unseen owner, and without showing verbal or non-verbal cues that shed light on their intent, we must demand that these types of questions be answered explicitly.
As a roboticist, I get asked the question, “When will robots take over the world?” so often that I’ve developed a stock answer: “As soon as I tell them to.” However, my joke is underpinned by an important lesson: don’t scapegoat machines for decisions made by humans.
I consider myself a robot sympathizer because I think robots get unfairly blamed for many human decisions and errors. It is important that we periodically remind ourselves that a robot is not your friend, your enemy, or anything in between. A robot is a tool, wielded by a person (however far removed), and increasingly used to influence us.
Article byShane Saunderson, Ph.D. Candidate, Robotics,University of Toronto
This article is republished fromThe Conversationunder a Creative Commons license. Read theoriginal article.
Story byThe Conversation
An independent news and commentary website produced by academics and journalists.An independent news and commentary website produced by academics and journalists.
Get the TNW newsletter
Get the most important tech news in your inbox each week.
