Europe's robots to become 'electronic persons' under draft plan


A "Nao" humanoid robot, by Aldebaran Robotics that offers basic service information, moves during a presentation at a branch of the Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ (MUFG) in Tokyo April 13, 2015.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/europes-robots-become-electronic-persons-under-draft-plan-170708335--sector.html?ref=gs/

MUNICH, Germany (Reuters) - Europe's growing army of robot workers could be classed as "electronic persons" and their owners liable to paying social security for them if the European Union adopts a draft plan to address the realities of a new industrial revolution.

Robots are being deployed in ever-greater numbers in factories and also taking on tasks such as personal care or surgery, raising fears over unemployment, wealth inequality and alienation.

Their growing intelligence, pervasiveness and autonomy requires rethinking everything from taxation to legal liability, a draft European Parliament motion, dated May 31, suggests.

Some robots are even taking on a human form. Visitors to the world's biggest travel show in March were greeted by a lifelike robot developed by Japan's Toshiba <6502.T> and were helped by another made by France's Aldebaran Robotics.

However, Germany's VDMA, which represents companies such as automation giant Siemens and robot maker Kuka , says the proposals are too complicated and too early.

German robotics and automation turnover rose 7 percent to 12.2 billion euros ($13.8 billion) last year and the country is keen to keep its edge in the latest industrial technology. Kuka is the target of a takeover bid by China's Midea <000333.SZ>.

The draft motion called on the European Commission to consider "that at least the most sophisticated autonomous robots could be established as having the status of electronic persons with specific rights and obligations".

It also suggested the creation of a register for smart autonomous robots, which would link each one to funds established to cover its legal liabilities.

Patrick Schwarzkopf, managing director of the VDMA's robotic and automation department, said: "That we would create a legal framework with electronic persons - that's something that could happen in 50 years but not in 10 years."

"We think it would be very bureaucratic and would stunt the development of robotics," he told reporters at the Automatica robotics trade fair in Munich, while acknowledging that a legal framework for self-driving cars would be needed soon.

The report added that robotics and artificial intelligence may result in a large part of the work now done by humans being taken over by robots, raising concerns about the future of employment and the viability of social security systems.

The draft motion, drawn up by the European parliament's committee on legal affairs also said organizations should have to declare savings they made in social security contributions by using robotics instead of people, for tax purposes.

Schwarzkopf said there was no proven correlation between increasing robot density and unemployment, pointing out that the number of employees in the German automotive industry rose by 13 percent between 2010 and 2015, while industrial robot stock in the industry rose 17 percent in the same period.

The motion faces an uphill battle to win backing from the various political blocks in European Parliament. Even if it did get enough support to pass, it would be a non-binding resolution as the Parliament lacks the authority to propose legislation.

Anyone else seeing The Terminator storyline becoming a possibility.....

Oh yea.. & China is in the lead

Sony Japan is in the lead. China has only thru politics become USA manufacturer. No real imagination.

and the LOOTING of the EU continues!

Our dems will have them able to cast a vote. Learn from the masters Europe.

Imagine the Slush-Fund that will create for the controlling Elite!

The perfect robot!!

It is an issue that we may well have to address.

Although it's probably a long way off, we could well build machines that are recognised as having intelligence and it's not beyond the bounds of possibility that they may eventually match or exceed ours. What then?

http://www.fornewintellectual.com/2016/06/the-irrational-fear-of-ai.html

The Irrational Fear of AI
Apparently Bill Gates is worried that the science fiction scenarios we have seen in dystopian movies like Terminator and The Matrix could come to pass if mankind doesn’t find a way of dealing with super-intelligent computer systems. In a Q&A session on Reddit, Gates said: “I am in the camp that is concerned about super-intelligence. First the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super-intelligent. That should be positive if we manage it well. A few decades after that though the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern.”

Elon Musk fears that artificial intelligence has the potential to be more dangerous than nuclear weapons. In a tweet, he said: “Worth reading Superintelligence by Bostrom. We need to be super careful with AI. Potentially more dangerous than nukes.” The book that Musk has referred to in his tweet is Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies by Nick Bostrom, who is a professor of philosophy at Oxford University. Musk is so worried about the threat AI poses to humanity that he has donated a few million dollars for AI research.

I must admit—I am not a fan of Professor Nick Bostrom, who, I think, is as philosophically challenged as he is scientifically challenged. His writings, full of inconsistencies, false prophecies, and scientific errors, aim at only one thing—the creation of an AI bogeyman. He thinks that it is possible for an advanced computer system to suddenly become conscious and takeover the world. But such notions of AI are the stuff of science fiction; they have nothing to do with reality.

In his book, Bostrom talks about intelligence explosion, which he thinks will occur when the machines, which are more clever than human beings, start designing machines of their own. He defines super-intelligence as an intellect that vastly outperforms the best human brains in practically every field. Bostrom writes: “Before the prospect of an intelligence explosion, we humans are like small children playing with a bomb. We have little idea when the detonation will occur, though if we hold the device to our ear we can hear a faint ticking sound.”

Bostrom believes that the odds are pretty good that we are living in a world that is a computer simulation. In his paper, Are you Living in a Computer Simulation?, he argues that the exponential growth of computing power proves that either we are already living in a simulated world or we are on the verge of creating a simulation.

A computer simulation, in essence, consists of software code typed on a hard disk—if Bostrom believes that such a code can become conscious, then he must offer some perceptual or conceptual evidence. But he has no evidence to offer; he is making a totally arbitrary assertion. A software code, written on a hard disk, is like the patterns of ink written on paper—if Bostrom believes that software can become conscious, then by his logic, the books and magazines in our shelves can also come to life.

By claiming that we are living in a computer simulation, Bostrom is proposing skepticism about existence. He is claiming that existence doesn’t exist, and that what you see is not reality, but a software-induced imagery. It is clear that he is a believer in the idea of “primacy of consciousness.” Ayn Rand in her book, Philosophy: Who Needs It, has said that the primacy of consciousness is “the notion that the universe has no independent existence, that it is the product of a consciousness (either human or divine or both).”

When Bostrom proposes that a super-intelligent software is a possibility, then he professes a belief in a new kind of God, a God that is created through advanced software and hardware. According to traditional religions, God created existence out of void by means of arbitrary whim— similarly in the world of Bostrom’s imagination, the “Software God” creates existence by means of arbitrary whim in the void of cyberspace.

Bostrom applies the concept of intelligence to advanced computing systems without any logical basis. Just because a stand-alone computer or a computer system has a massive computing power, it doesn’t mean that it’s also intelligent. In his book How We Know, Harry Binswanger has offered a nuanced view of the issue of nonbiological intelligence that is not common in contemporary discourse. Here's an excerpt from Binswanger's book:

"The nonbiological perspective stands markedly revealed in the common question: is it possible to develop a computer that can think? My answer is: before a computer could think, it would have to be able to understand ideas (concepts); before it could understand ideas, it would have to be able to perceive the world and to feel emotions, such as pleasure and pain, desire and fear; before it could perceive and feel emotions, it would have to be alive — i.e., be engaged in action to sustain itself. We can dismiss notions about a thinking computer until one is built that is alive — and then it wouldn’t be a computer but a living organism, a man-made one.”

Bostrom claims that as artificial intelligences are software, they can be easily and quickly copied, so long as there is hardware available to store them, and this can lead to large numbers of artificial minds getting created quickly. But the proposition that intelligence is software which can be transferred from one body to another is illogical. This is because a computer is never intelligent, it cannot perform any cognitive task. A computer is simply a machine in which the flow of current flips the switches, as per the laws of physics.

By virtue of the entrepreneurial success that they have achieved, Bill Gates and Elon Musk enjoy great popularity around the world. It is a tragedy that they’re now using their celebrity status to promote the anti-technology ideas of Professor Nick Bostrom. The truth is that we have no reason to loose sleep over the AI bogeyman. The advancements in computer science will lead to the creation of incredibly powerful tools for expanding mankind’s capabilities and access to resources. Such machines will lead to vast improvements in the human condition.

Posted by Anoop Verma at 00:13:00