皮皮学,免费搜题
登录
搜题
【简答题】
In the beginning of the movie I, Robot, a robot has to decide whom to save after two cars plunge into the water—Del Spooner or a child. Even though Spooner screams "Save her! Save her! " the robot rescues him because it calculates that he has a 45 percent chance of survival compared to Sarah’s 11 percent. The robots decision and its calculated approach raise an important question: would humans make the same choice? And which choice would we want our robotic counterparts to make? Isaac Asimov evaded the whole notion of morality in devising his three laws of robotics, which hold that 1. Robots cannot harm humans or allow humans to come to harm; 2. Robots must obey humans, except where the order would conflict with law 1; and 3. Robots must act in self-preservation, unless doing so conflicts with laws 1 or 2. These laws are programmed into Asimov's robots—they don't have to think, judge, or value. They don't have to like humans or believe that hurting them is wrong or bad. They simply don't do it. The robot who rescues Spooners life in I, Robot follows Asimovs zero law: robots cannot harm humanity (as opposed to individual humans) or allow humanity to come to harm—an expansion of the first law that allows robots to determine what's in the greater good. Under the first law, a robot could not harm a dangerous gunman, but under the zero law, a robot could kill the gunman to save others. Whether it's possible to program a robot with safeguards such as Asimov’s laws is debatable. A word such as "harm "is vague (what about emotional harm? Is replacing a human employee harm?), and abstract concepts present coding problems. The robots in Asimov’s fiction expose complications and loopholes in the three laws, and even when the laws work, robots still have to assess situations. Assessing situations can be complicated. A robot has to identify the players, conditions, and possible outcomes for various scenarios. It's doubtful that a computer program can do that—at least, not without some undesirable results. A roboticist at the Bristol Robotics Laboratory programmed a robot to save human proxies ( 替身 ) called “H-bots” from danger. When one H-bot headed for danger, the robot successfully pushed it out of the way. But when two H-bots became imperiled, the robot choked 42 percent of the time, unable to decide which to save and letting them both "die." The experiment highlights the importance of morality: without it, how can a robot decide whom to save or what's best for humanity, especially if it can't calculate survival odds?
拍照语音搜题,微信中搜索"皮皮学"使用
参考答案:
参考解析:
知识点:
.
..
皮皮学刷刷变学霸
举一反三
【简答题】Sentence Paraphrase 2 If you are too much in a hurry, or too arrogantly proud of your own limitations, to accept as a gift to your humanity some pieces of minds of Aristotle, or Chaucer, or Einstein, ...
【简答题】That ridiculous idea was put forward by his brother.
【简答题】Paraphrase: These are the stories for the quarter page that you are going to devote to something other than local affairs or diverting your audience.
【单选题】Personally, I feel that the idea of moving is ridiculous.
A.
interrupting
B.
Preventing interrupting
C.
offering an opinion
【单选题】A new idea is first condemned as ridiculous, ___ dismissed as trivial, until finally it becomes what everybody knows. (William James)
A.
after that
B.
then
C.
and then
D.
later
【简答题】Paraphrase the following sentences Fame turns all the lights on and while it gives power and reputation, it takes the you out of you: you must be what the public thinks you are, not what you really ar...
【简答题】The idea that we all have a sixth sense is not as ridiculous as is sometimes made out.
【简答题】互联网 人 常挂在 嘴边的 BAT 通常是 指
【单选题】She thought his idea was so ridiculous that it was ______________.
A.
unattractive
B.
insane
【单选题】信息的第一和基本性质是( )。
A.
共享性
B.
增值性
C.
转换性
D.
事实性
相关题目: