2010-07 - Korea IT Times

How to..
How to Design
a Safe Nano Robot or Virus
A Moore's Law or similar ratio for ethics? Asimov's law and risks of nanotechnology as ascribed
by the center for responsible nanotechnology
Ethics issues of a different
type have begun to spring up
for science and technology
due to a combination of factors.
There are credibility issues
that may hatch trust issues
resultant from intentional
and unintentional expected
[in a democracy at
Benjamin Franklin Working at his desk
least] questioning of findings
in environmental studies and science becoming reality as scientists
in various fields from varying epistemological backgrounds
grapple with timeframes, conceptualisations and facts. But as
consumers and scientists come to understand the capacity of science
and technology to innovate and that this capacity is increasing
rapidly, there needs great thinkers on the side of wisdom to
steer us from wanton disaster.
It is interesting and very noteworthy that modern society looks
back for guidance to thinkers such as Aristotle and Asimov for
ethics. It is likely that human ethics in terms of acceptable standards
have improved in some cases but there are only laws similar
to Moore's Law calculations for innovation of technologies
available, not ethics, a most worthy calculation.
Issac Asimov ascribed three laws in the design of robots that
movies, and consumers worry that some scientists too, have reversed
to create plots intended to entertain for 120 minutes. Issac
Asimov's 3 Laws of Robotics:
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction,
allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings except
where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection
does not conflict with either the First or Second Law.
As scientists get closer to making items such as the Minority
Report's screen a reality, the voice of caution seems to ask too,
what is a robot? Nanotechnology has taken flight into the realms
of fantasy too and so have consumers' fears on what nano is motivated
by. As companies post pictures of ingestible RFID the
Center for Responsible Nanotechnology [CRN] lists the major
pitfalls, as they correspond to each of Asimov's laws, as follows:
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction,
allow a human being to come to harm.
ᆞNanotech weapons would be extremely powerful and
could lead to a dangerously unstable arms race.
ᆞCriminals and terrorists could make effective use of the
technology.
ᆞExtreme solutions and abusive regulations may be attempted
[this is the surveillance concern].
ᆞToo little or too much regulation can result in unrestricted
availability [Why worry about the human spies?
... Beware the atomic spies].
ᆞCompeting nanotech programs increase the danger
[the new arms race...acknowledged].
2. A robot must obey orders given to it by human beings except
where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
ᆞGrey goo was an early concern of nanotechnology.
ᆞToo little or too much regulation can result in unrestricted
availability [Why worry about the human spies?
... Beware the atomic spies and remote activation of ingestibles].
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection
does not conflict with either the First or Second Law.
62 KOREA IT TIMES | July 2010