Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?

Submission + - Robots Are Strong: The Sci-Fi Myth of Robotic Competence ( 1

malachiorion writes: When it comes to robots, most of us are a bunch of John Snow know-nothings. With the exception of roboticists, everything we assume we know is based on science fiction, which has no reason to be accurate about its iconic heroes and villains, or journalists, who are addicted to SF references, jokes and tropes. That's my conclusion, at least, after a story I wrote Popular Science got some attention—it asked whether a robotic car should kill its owner, if it means saving two strangers. The most common dismissals of the piece claimed that robo-cars should simply follow Asimov's First Law, or that robo-cars would never crash into each other. These perspectives are more than wrong-headed—they ignore the inherent complexity and fallibility of real robots, for whom failure is inevitable. Here's my follow-up story, about why most of our discussion of robots is based on make-believe, starting with the myth of robotic hyper-competence. Bishop
This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Robots Are Strong: The Sci-Fi Myth of Robotic Competence

Comments Filter:
  • I was about to write something about the story diving into Bishop's unexplained level of perfection, but wound up leaving that last, stupid, orphaned word. Sorry!

Fear is the greatest salesman. -- Robert Klein