The work has not been graded but I like the output that was submitted to me. Is it possible for the same prof to do the next assignment I will be submitting? If possible, I will greatly appreciate it.
Project
08/09/2022
Computers and society — case study assignments
Hello, I have two assignments I will put the informations down below.
That’s the information in the syllabus : Case Studies. You will analyze nine case studies in the form of news commentaries, extra readings or current ethical issues. Your lowest single score will be dropped. I do not accept late assignments for any excuse, including computer problems. Case studies are posted on the course website each week on a Monday or a Wednesday and due one week later before class. Case studies are submitted online from any computer connected to the Internet. Note that I am particularly picky in how you use sources for your answers to case studies. I want your words. You may quote to illustrate a point, but you must make that point in your own words. Any quotes must be marked. Comments and your grade will be attached to your online submission, and you can view it from the website if you are logged on. Only you can see the grade and the feedback.
Thats the Case study assignments down
Case Study 1: The Age of Moral Machines
resources.
Moral theory
robotic timeline
Hans Moravec’s homepage
THE THREE LAWS OF ROBOTICS I, Robot by Isaac Asimov. 1941-1950.
ORIGINAL VERSION
- A robot may not injure a human being, or through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
- A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
- A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
SECOND VERSION
- No robot may harm a human being.
- A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
- A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
THIRD VERSION
- No Machine may harm humanity; or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
- A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
- A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
The “Three Laws of Robotics” is Asimov’s underlying moral system for the robots in his science fiction work I, Robot. Humans program the robots with three inviolate laws. Throughout the course of the book the Three Laws evolve from the original to the final (third) version. Humans make the first alteration. Robots make the final alteration. Notice that the only difference between the three versions is the First Law. Answer the following questions about Asimov’s moral system. Submit your answers online. You may cut and paste into the answer field.
- Categorize the original version by one of the moral theories discussed in class (deontology, utilitarianism, rights theory, social contract theory, etc.). Justify your choice.
- Categorize the third version by one of the moral theories discussed in class. Justify your choice.
- Under which version could a robot directly harm one human to save another?
- What would a robot do in a situation where two people are at risk and only one can be saved? State the version you are appealing to.
- Read “Robot Dreams” by Asimov. In this short story a rogue robot “dreams” a new moral system for robots. Which ethical theory best categorizes this new moral system?
——————————————————————————————————————————-
Case Study 2 — The Lights in the Tunnel
Throughout history, new technology has brought us efficiencies that raised the standard of living but at the same time eliminated jobs, sometimes in unexpected ways. Where are the buggy whip manufacturers? The most famous case is the advent of automated looms in the early 19th century which threw skilled weavers out of work (see Ned Lud.) Workers are always upset when their jobs are eliminated (see Luddites.)
Economists point out (as your textbook does) that in every case, jobs that have been eliminated are soon replaced with new jobs, even better jobs. There are also lots of less attractive jobs created as well, but the effect has always been a net increase in economic activity and prosperity. They refer to “the Luddite Fallacy” any time someone worries that new technology will destroy jobs, and so far they’ve always been right.
In his book The Lights in the Tunnel, software developer Martin Ford suggests that this might not always be the case, that automation will soon be so good that human labor might not be needed. Read Chapter 2 — Acceleration of his book and answer the following questions.
- Assuming Moore’s law continues over the next 20 or 30 years, what can we say about how powerful computer technology will grow? Don’t just say “a lot,” be quantitative. What might that suggest about the capacity of Artificial Intelligence? Include an explanation of Moore’s Law.
- Most AI researchers acknowledge the development of “Weak AI” (task specific intelligence.) Some AI researchers consider the prospect of “Strong AI” (i.e. a general purpose Artificial Intelligence similar to a human mind) to be unattainable. Others consider that it is very likely that strong AI will appear in the next 20 to 30 years. Does Ford consider it to be necessary to achieve strong AI (human level intelligence) before we have to worry that AIs will take over human jobs? Why or why not?
- Ford suggests that “offshoring,” the big boogieman of the “oughties” (first decade of the 21st Century) is a temporary problem. Why does he say that? Might we be seeing the effect he’s suggesting? If the manufacturing returns to the US, what effect might it have on jobs in the US?
- What sorts of jobs would be the hardest to automate? Are some jobs safe forever? Why or why not?
- Is the past a good predictor of the future? What is Ford’s argument that the Luddite Fallacy may not be a fallacy after all?
