Trial by jury of peers might be a bit tricky
Did HAL commit murder? What would it take? I wrote this piece back in 1997, but it seems more relevant today.https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/when-hal-kills-computer-ethics/ …
-
-
-
Don't mean it's insurmountable just that if I was the defense counsel I'd have a field day
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It would take evolution to generate a machine capable to display intentionality (thus understand the context of its world) and decision making (os some sort). Light years distance from anything that is in place nowadays.
-
HAL isn’t in place nowadays.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It probably didn't. The people who built it did, though
-
Can we use our upbringing as an excuse in court? I think we can but that won't change the guilty verdict.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
To resolve competing knowledges (the astronauts who do not know about the monolith and its beaming Jupiter space) and his own awareness equal to the project managers (who DO know), HAL correctly deems astronauts antagonists when one defies scrutiny regarding the mission. Murder.
-
And btw, it's quite logical. The film displays murder as the logical outcome of the pursuit of knowledge (the opening), and HAL's murder spree is shown as a continuum with the opening murder.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Great piece. IMO Hal commits murder because by the end of the book/film he is jealous and prideful. He cheats in the chess game for example. The astronauts are cool and detached while he is the most human and thus capable of murder.
-
Where does he cheat in the chess game?
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.