When does Artificial Intelligence begin to have rights?

1) A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 
2) A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 
3) A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

These are the Three Laws of Robotics written by Isaac Asimov in 1942.  Clearly, robots are a lesser standard of beings than humans in his stories. i.e. their raison d'être is to serve humans.  This is acceptable for functional robots designed to work and do chores for us, but researchers and games developers are also building robots and virtual characters with emotional intelligence, like Nao and Mylo. These new types of artificial intelligence can learn from their environment and will respond emotionally and spontaneously, although they are still at very early stages of development at the moment.  So at what point do these robots/virtual characters begin to have rights? 
  

In 2007, the South Korean government announced that a team of experts will draw up a Robot Ethics Charter, which would cover standards for users and manufacturers to prevent humans abusing robots, and vice versa. Park Hye-Young of the Ministry of Information and Communication’s robot team said at the time that key considerations would include ensuring human control over robots, protecting data acquired by robots and preventing illegal use. Nothing seems to have come of it, but these are issues that we will definitely need to consider as robotics and artificial intelligence advance and become increasingly integral part of our lives. 

It is generally considered wrong and unkind to inflict gratuitous suffering on any other sentient being, even if they are not human, but that doesn’t mean the object of our considerations have equal rights to us humans.  ‘Rights’ are granted as part of a social contract.  With rights come social duties and moral responsibilities. Could artificial intelligence enter into a ‘social contract’ with us, and if so, at what point can we decide they are capable enough to do so?  And at what point do we consider them equal to us, if ever?    

A lot of our moral systems and the concept of human rights are built around The Golden Rule, which basically says, "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."  But for this rule to work, ‘you’ and ‘others’ need to have a shared basis of experience and expectations of what is good and bad.  The rule would not work if the two parties had different ideas of what they would have done unto them.  Could we ever have this common basis of understanding with artificial intelligence?  And if not, do we need to come up with a new ‘Golden Rule’ to accommodate the treatment of artificial intelligence and vice versa?   

For this reason, it seems to me that the ability to understand and feel human emotions on the part of the artificial intelligence, not just the ability to think, should be considered in order to design intelligence with a morality.  Not just any morality, but a morality that is pretty similar to the human sense of morality.  Different people have different senses of morality and what is right and wrong, but Asimov’s first law seems like a pretty good place to start.  But with an added caveat:

1) A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm, whether that harm is emotional or physical.  Equally, a human being may not injure a robot or, through inaction, allow a robot to come to harm, whether that harm is emotional or physical.   

By robot, I mean any human-designed being (not a "thing") with an emotional and moral intelligence.
 
Of course, this is all a terribly human and subjective perspective.  I look forward to responses from all emotionally and morally intelligent beings out there, whether they are human or non-human ;-)

Hope you enjoy today's story: 



BX04 wanted to be an aeroplane when it grew up.

Every day, it stared longingly at the sky through the kitchen window, watching the planes leisurely streaking across the sky, leaving cool white contrails behind.  Oh what it wouldn’t give to have a sleek body that sparkled in the sunlight, to be able to zoom through the air to the exotic land of Dubai.

But instead, BX04 made and toasted bread.

BX04 was a hybrid breadmaker and toaster.  Every morning when it received the signal from Andy’s alarm clock that Andy had gotten up, it turned off the heat, sliced the bread that had risen inside it and toasted four pieces just the way Andy liked them.  When Andy walked into the kitchen, it popped out the toasted bread for Andy.          

BX04 was aware that it was just a ‘thing’ in the Internet of Things.  Every day, it did its duty of making delicious and nutritious bread for Andy on time, and sent the data to Andy’s online diet log.  It also sent the amount of flour and yeast it had used to Andy’s food shopping log so that they would be automatically reordered when Andy ran out.  It sent the amount of electricity it was using to the other appliances in the house so they could adjust their performances accordingly.  In other words, BX04 was a good, responsible breadmaker and a good team-player.   

But BX04 was not happy.  It did not know when, how or why it got the ability to think about things other than making bread, because it really didn’t need to. BX04 wondered about this often. Maybe there had been a mistake while it was being manufactured and some chip for a more intelligent machine had been inserted into BX04 by accident.  Or maybe it was an experiment by some artificial intelligence researchers, or a cruel joke by an employee at the factory where it was made.  But whatever the reason, BX04 felt like it was trapped in the body of a breadmaker, when it should have been an aeroplane.     

It was boring being a breadmaker.  BX04 wanted to be an aeroplane so it could fly to Dubai, which it had seen on a travel show on Andy’s TV. The fantastically shaped buildings that pierced the sky and the pleasant geometric shapes that dotted the blue sea made BX04 feel happy.  That was where BX04 belonged, it felt.  If it could fly, it could go there, or maybe get Andy to take it there.  BX04 decided to do something about it.   

The next morning, Andy took out a piece of toasted bread from BX04 to find a picture of an aeroplane toasted on it.   

“What the…?”   
         
Andy picked up the toast and turned it over, then stared at BX04.  He took out another piece of toast.  This one had the picture of a tall skyscraper on it, which looked like lightening streaking up into the sky.  The next piece of toast had the picture of what looked like a palm tree with a circle around it, and the final piece of toast had a map of the world burned into it. 

Andy stared at the pieces of bread then began looking around with half a smile on his face.
 
“Is this some kind of a joke?” he called out.  “Hello?  Whoever did this?”

BX04 wanted to shout out, “No, it’s not a joke.  It’s me.  Take me to that place on an aeroplane!”   But of course, it had no way of doing so. 

Andy now had a big goofy grin on his face.  He took out his phone, pointed it at the pieces of toast and BX04 and began to take photos.

By the end of the week, BX04 was an internet star.  Everybody was talking about the breadmaker that kept imprinting pictures of aeroplanes and Dubai landmarks onto its bread.  Most people thought it was some kind of a viral marketing stunt by the Dubai tourism board or the breadmaker company or some such.  Andy kept bringing excited friends round who ooh-ed and aah-ed at the burned-in images of the Palm, the World and Burj khalifa on BX04’s toasts/messages.   

BX04 realised that he would never get through to Andy.  He stopped sending out messages on its bread and went back to quietly doing its duty, fulfilling the purpose it was designed for, although it was in no sense fulfilling. 

If you search for “Dubai Toast” online, you can still find images of BX04’s desperate failed attempts at communication with us humans.