zlacker

On the contrary. I can safely say I have read litterally dozens of his book, both fiction and nonfiction, also have read countless short stories and many of his essays. He is one of my all time favorite writers actually.

>>smegge+(OP)
and what you got from the I Robot stories is that there is zero probability of danger? Fascinating

>>arisAl+CK
none of the stories in i robot i can remember feature the robots intentionally harming humans/humanity most of them are essentially stories of a few robot technicians trying to debug unexpected behaviors resulting form conflicting directives given to the robots. so yeah. you wouldn't by chance be thinking of that travesty of a movie that shares only a name in common with his book and seemed to completely misrepresent his take on ai?

Thought to be honest in my original post I was more thinking of Asimov's nonfiction essays on the subject. I recommend finding a copy of "Robot Visons" if you can. Its a mixed work of fictional short stories and nonfiction essays including several on the subject of the three laws and on the Frankenstein Complex.

>>smegge+241
Again "they will be aligned with us because they designed such that their motivation will be to serve us." If you got this outcome from reading I robot either you should reread them because obviously it was decades ago or you build your own safe reality to match your arguments. Usually it's the latter.

>>arisAl+zn3
And yet again I didn't get it from I Robot, I got it from Asimov's NON-fiction writing which I referenced in my previous post. Even if it had gotten it based on his fictional works, which again I didn't, the majority of his robot centric novels (caves of steal, naked sun, robots of dawn, robots and empire, prelude to foundation, forward the foundation, second foundation trilogy etc all feature benevolent AIs aligned with humanity.