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