Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!gatech!linus!mbunix!bwk From: bwk@mitre-bedford.ARPA (Barry W. Kort) Newsgroups: comp.ai Subject: Re: Punishment of machines Message-ID: <31385@linus.UUCP> Date: 9 May 88 16:02:01 GMT References: <770@onion.cs.reading.ac.uk> <1177@bingvaxu.cc.binghamton.edu> <10942@sunybcs.UUCP> <31024@linus.UUCP> <17434@glacier.STANFORD.EDU> Sender: news@linus.UUCP Reply-To: bwk@mbunix (Barry Kort) Distribution: comp Organization: International Teleport and Telepath, Beantown, Mass. Lines: 20 Keywords: randomness responsibility Summary: Save me a seat!! No, wait, ... I can't watch! I was fascinated by John Nagle's rejoinder to my remarks about punishing a machine. John writes: > The concept of a machine which could be productively punished is >not totally unreasonable. It is, in fact, a useful property for some robots >to have. Robots that operate in the real world need mechanisms that implement >fear and pain to survive. Such machines will respond positively to punishment. > > I am working toward this end, am constructing suitable hardware and >software, and expect to demonstrate such robots in about a year. John's posting reminded me of the short story, "Soul of the Mark III Beast" which appears in _The Mind's I_. While I cannot dispute John's point that a game of engineered darwinism might produce a race of hardy robots, I must confess that I am troubled by the concept. Would not the survivors be liable to rising up against their creators in a titanic struggle for dominance and survival? Would we erect a new colliseum to enjoy the spectacle of intermachine warfare? Why am I both excited and horrified by the thought? --Barry Kort