Markou spoke in the article: "How do we face the issue of robotic crime? We should be scared? This is of no avail. Or we shrug, if colleagues are not concerned, and then indulge in the virtual world on Netflix. It's certainly easy to do this, but we shouldn't be. What we have to do is face the reality and work out a solution! "Next is a few topics he explored in the article.
Who should bear the culpability if criminal acts occur? Is the criminal robot still its master?
Markou was an early researcher on the issue of robotic crime. He was puzzled by how the culprit should be defined if the robot did something illegal. For example, if a driver had died in a car crash while using Tesla’s self-driving car, would the US government find Tesla innocent, is it reasonable to do so? Another example is that a robot was arrested for drug purchases in Switzerland and was later found not guilty. Is it reasonable to release the robot and acquit it?
How to define the criminal issues of robots looks hard to do. However, we can find some hopes from the Markou comments mentioned above. In his article, he wrote: "While the Wright brothers invented the plane, who would have thought that humans could soar in the air? Time and again history has shown that the law can be continuously improved, even if the law in the beginning has inadequacies, It will eventually be perfected. In a word, the law can keep pace with the times. "
The purpose of the law is to stabilize social expectations
Before studying the problem of tricky robot crimes, Markou put forward his thinking about why the society needs supporting legal systems. Markou believes: "The fundamental purpose of the law is to stabilize people's expectations in society. For example, if you are robbed, your expectation is that the gang is severely punished according to law."
Then, Markou pointed out that the law is a kind of compliance, it binds people and lets people take responsibility. This compliance also applies to all types of organizations. He explained: "As an organization, a company also has a legal personality. This legal personality grants certain economic and legal rights to the company, but more importantly it also gives the company responsibility."
Robot self-assertion
The tricky thing now is that the perfection of the law is imminent. Robotics platforms based on artificial intelligence are about to be put into commercial use, and current laws are difficult to define such issues as the following:
If advanced machines commit crimes themselves, how does the law define them?
How does a lawyer demonstrate the "crime motive" of a robot?
If there is an incident of robotic crimes, should we comply with the existing laws or revise the law?
The "crime motive" mentioned by Markou in the article is a concept worth pondering. He wrote: "The provisions of criminal law are that criminals are punished for their own crimes. The idea behind the term "criminal motive" is that a criminal is defined as guilty on two levels, criminal behavior and criminal motivation. That is to say, on the one hand they have committed crimes, on the other hand they also have criminal motives or intentions, or they know that their actions may harm others.
If AI technology has been so complicated that it can bypass people's control and commit crimes on their own, it will be crucial at this time to define the harm, avoid the risks, and determine the fault and punishment. Therefore, Markou believes that future robots are likely to commit crimes. He also pointed out: "Although robots may commit crimes, it is difficult for us to define its criminal motivation. For example, if a robot causes death, its criminal behavior can be determined legally, but its Criminal motivation is hard to define because it is not human after all."
If the robot is defined as guilty, how can it be punished?
Do not think about it, how to define whether the robot is guilty of crime has been very difficult. Markou said in a slightly ridiculous way: "Then let's just make this problem more complicated. Let's talk about how to punish." He wrote: "If a robot is sentenced to 30 years in accordance with the law, the robot will not be old. Will not be ill, and it is impossible to miss the one you love. What kind of punishment can this play?
Markou said at the end of the article: “At present, we still cannot achieve systematic protection of human rights on a global scale and crimes occur from time to time. I can't help but think that we can’t stop human crimes, if the era of robotic crime is really When we arrived, can we cope?"
Fast thyristors (Inverter Thyristor)are used for higher frequency rectification. Inverter and inverter circuit appliances.
Rectifiers have many uses, but are often found serving as components of DC power supplies and high-voltage direct current power transmission systems. Rectification may serve in roles other than to generate direct current for use as a source of power. As noted, detectors of radio signals serve as rectifiers. In gas heating systems flame rectification is used to detect presence of a flame.
Inverter Thyristor,Power Inverter Thyristor,Frequency Inverter Thyristor,Electronic Component Inverter Thyristor,Bi-directional Controlled Thyristors (BCT)
YANGZHOU POSITIONING TECH CO., LTD. , https://www.cnchipmicro.com