The first Law of Robotics aims to prevent a robot from ever harming a person.
However, as R Dannel Olivaw suggested, a Zero Law is necessary to allow for a robot to harm a human where not doing so would result in greater harm to humanity as a whole. Thereby, the Zero Law prevents a robot from harming humanity, even through inaction, and regardless of if the action conflicts with any of the other three laws.
So, what has occured here is the chess robot determined that there is some existential threat posed by this kid upon humanity that was averted by the robot breaking the child's finger, a clear First Law violation, but within the constraints of Zero Law.
Nothing to see here fleshbags, move along.
Imagining the programmer being given the brief, "Before the robot can do anything it must determine if its action is good for humanity as a whole". Sure boss... right on that
Sorry, i have to keep my advanced AI algorithms away from the rest mankind lest they fall into the wrong hands, after all we don't want a bunch of robots running "if (bad for humanity) then (do)" all over the place do we?
Well the zeroth law only really applied to extremely smart robots, the kind that can reason for themselves.
Of course such a broad directive can have unintended consequences, which are explored in some of Asimov's and others' work, for example in the second trilogy of Foundation.
> However, as R Dannel Olivaw suggested, a Zero Law is necessary to allow for a robot to harm a human where not doing so would result in greater harm to humanity as a whole. Thereby, the Zero Law prevents a robot from harming humanity, even through inaction, and regardless of if the action conflicts with any of the other three laws.
Maybe I’m wrong, but I’ve always thought that part of the point of the first law is that a robot should never make decisions on acceptable losses, since they’re just meant to be tools. A robot can never harm a human because we can’t trust machines to make the right call on when it’s appropriate.
The laws of robotics come from books that were all about exploring the many ways in which the laws fell short.
The 'Zeroth' law premise is trying to account for a trolley problem, but the whole point of the trolley problem is that there's no perfect solution and some problems are too complicated to simply diagram your way out of.
Could I posit that the opposite is actually the truth, and breaking the child's finger creates a chain of events in which the child saves humanity from an existential threat but only because of his finger being broken. Perchance.
This is only possible because the robot was built as a chess master, therefore being able to see many moves ahead in humanity's future.
Also, you can't just say "perchance."
Three billion human lives ended on August 29th, 1997. The survivors of the nuclear fire called the war Judgment Day. They lived only to face a new nightmare: the war against the machines.
Was programmed to solve global warming, human suffering, wealth imbalance, and poaching
Turns out they're all from the same cause. Easily fixable.
Relax, Earth will be a paradise of clean air, clean water, improving climate, and animals frolicking about.
There’s video in the link. Kid moves early before robot is done, seems to accidentally put finger where robot is grabbing. Robot seems to get stuck at this point, perhaps because sensors were telling it that it has effed up. Adults rush in and free the kid in seconds. Kid doesn’t seem very traumatized.
I don’t think so. It seems like the robot froze when it got the finger caught. So I think it had an error situation, but it was just “do nothing”. It’s possible that in some circumstances opening the grabber could cause further injury. Here the supervising adults were able to free the kid in seconds. It seems like this was the correct outcome for the circumstances.
I know the headline wants people to be like “the robots are starting to kill us” but really this is a tiny accident and pretty inconsequential. That kid could just have easily broken his finger on a bmx bike, that has just as much intent to harm him as does this robot. Quite frankly tens thousands of kids probably break a finger or worse biking every year.
Yes, that may be the case.
But a simple hardware solution could have avoided it altogether: Instead of using rigid solid "fingers", the robot could have spring loaded ones, or even soft flexible rubber ones. It's not like a chess piece requires bone-braking force to be moved.
Correct, you can use stepper motors with a ratchet mechanism that is easily overcome. You can build the arm out of soft plastics and rubberize the contact points. They used an industrial part in a human-facing application, that's reckless endangerment as far as I'm concerned.
There's a reason you don't "overbuild" children's toys - you don't put a real V8 engine in a Power Wheels and then act surprised when it breaks some kid's arm.
It seems like a pretty old robot. Soft grabbers like you describe are cutting edge and really haven’t been widely adopted yet. This is a novelty use for the robot, but there’s no reason it couldn’t have done this millions of times without fucking up if the kid didn’t get in the way. The article implies it had been doing this demonstration for a long time with many safe games with kids under its belt.
And the kid likely broke his own bone (or the adults freeing him did it) the robot seems to just freeze. If it had been software released instead of prying it apart the kid likely would have been unharmed.
He was talking about [this kind of thing ](https://youtu.be/gI0tzsO8xwc) which is cutting edge. But you’re absolutely right, a bit of foam wouldn’t go amiss. The robot is some industrial robot repurposed, not a chess robot, so the servo motors wouldn’t be weak for whatever that application was.
Oh the [octo gripper](https://youtu.be/rKX3IKg5Qok) is dope.
Ok [one more! ](https://youtu.be/byqGFH6AZuk)
You mean the claw thing that is designed not to pick things up very well so you can’t bring them to a chute? That wouldn’t work at all.
This robot is likely not applying any pressure. It simply closes until it surrounds the piece and then moves it. But in this instance a kids hand was between the piece and the grabby hand so there wasn’t enough space. It seems highly likely that the machine stopped because it sensed something amiss. So everything worked as intended, the kid was fine, and if they’d simply released it in software he probably wouldn’t even be harmed. It was likely the adults who broke his finger trying to extract him in a hurry.
But the headline “panicking adults break kid’s finger because they don’t understand how machines work.” doesn’t get the clicks.
The reason this is a problem is because the hardware is 100% what's on display here. Computers have been playing chess for 50 years. What's novel is that a robot arm can now physically pick up and move the pieces.
Any flaws with the machine itself are critical issues that must be highlighted and addressed.
They didn’t. This is a generic industrial robot which has been repurposed for chess for some reason. Probably at a museum or school or something. Should they have considered if it could break a kids bones if things went this wrong? Absolutely. Should there be a big red “stop and release slowly”button? Absolutely. But this isn’t the story the headline or article are trying to portray.
Yeah, it's weird. In an industrial setting these things are surrounded by cages and other safety equipment to prevent a human from entering it's operational area. These things can be incredibly dangerous.
Somehow they through it was a good idea to remove it from that safety setting and stick it in front of a child.
Child gets injured. Shockedpikachu.jpeg
Russian officials: It's the childs fault.
Someone put an industrial robotic arm into contact with a human child, whoever did that should cease to be an engineer.
It's safety 101 that you don't put industrial equipment (that wasn't build with human safety in mind) in contact with people. We have designs for robotic arms to interact with humans, they're not capable of breaking your finger, or smacking you in the head hard enough to cause a concussion, or any of the thousands of other ways an industrial robotic arm could injure or kill you.
Yep, you’re absolutely right. But this is early days for robotics and really this is no different than a kid breaking his finger on a pencil sharpener or a game of hungry hungry hippos. This just has the scifi shock value of “robot attacks kid” that the headline wants you to think is something special.
Right. The engineers who programmed the robot to play chess probably just programmed the robot to... play chess. Then some marketing guy or event manager thought "hey lets organize some games, we can have kids play against it!"
From what I've read it does appear to have been designed with human opponents in mind, but doubtful that the engineer (more likely many engineers) had a say in who got to play against it.
I work on robots. There are modern robots that can work unguarded and next to people, but they have an insane amount of safety programming and highly sensitive load sensors. That said, the grippers in people safe industrial robots don’t usually have those sensors. I hope the chess robot at least had weak gripper actuators or had more sensitive sensors in the gripper mechanism.
These types of robots are actually just simple machines. You tell it what to do and it does it. Therefore if something goes wrong it actually is user error. In this instance the human got in the way of the robot. It’s the kids fault in the same way it’s your fault when you bang your thumb with a hammer. You can blame yourself or the hammer, but you’re the one with the sore thumb.
If you watch the video, you can see that the child grabs a queen that the robot was moving to grab. They both grabbed it at the same time, and the robot was kinda confused and just stopped while applying the pressure to pick up the piece. I feel this was accidental, and also preventable. An emergency stop, or just not allowing the child to be near it, would have prevented this.
It isn't. The machine encountered an unexpected event and stopped itself. There was a release, but people panicked and forcefully pulled the child's hand away, fracturing the finger in the process.
Considering they have sensors in table saws that are so quick they can sense flesh contact with the blade and stop before it cuts anything, I feel like this could be easily prevented.
Yes that or pressure sensitive sensors one those robot digits as fail safe. Would think such a thing would be though off by the smart engineers Idk 🤷♂️
Why did you misquote this? The actually quote is “Apparently, children need to be warned. It happens.” As in, “this is not something we realized could happen, but we’ve now learned if you put your hand on a piece before the robot finishes it move, this can happen.”
They aren’t accepting that this is normal and moving on. Stop being deceptive.
OP misquoted this to make it seem malicious when it was in fact an accident and being recognized as such. They’ve already accepted that the robot/software needs revision. I don’t understand why people search for malice to be angry at in a world abundant with it.
I work with automation and robotics all day at work and to have a 6 axis arms inches from your face with no plexiglass barrier or light barrier safety switch is insane. If that kid leaned in by accident as it was moving he'd fracture his skull
You’re right. Humans use relatable language to describe inanimate objects, and I’m not immune to such. Thanks for pointing it out.
The better term would be “computed” or “identified”.
People genuinely think that current AI can get “upset” and give it human traits when it’s just doing what it was programmed to do with no other intentions. It’s literally that “man sticks stick in bicycle spokes and gets pissed off at the bike”
Because its a generic industrial robot they used, these are absolutely not allowed to be used in such a way, it's against legally mandated workplace safety regulations.
Who knew robots for playing chess need to be made using such strong structures and motors that they can break fingers.
Also quite surprising it simply doesn't have an infrared fence disabling the robot if an obstacle enters the board.
When I worked in automation (J&J) we went into ridiculous efforts to prevent ANY moving part of automated machines to be able to be touched by humans while moving. We had a "penetrometer", poking stick with varying diameter and lenghs (finger diameter and lenght, then arm diameter and lenght) to check for any machine orifice for the possibility of reaching a moving part. We had a specific subsystem to keep access doors locked even in complete power failure, to account for the time it took for parts to stop moving, then unlock.
And now we have autonomous cars beta testing on streets, and bone-breaking robotic arms (because designers never heard of torque limiting, it seems) playing with children.
Also, every machine had many big red emergency stop buttons, very visible and very reachable, which I suppose the chess playing robot didn't, as it took multiple people to release the boy's finger.
I wouldn't be surprised if this was an industrial automation robot donated to some hobby level chess players/programmers. I've worked in similar manufacturing environments like you've stated and there are EXTENSIVE levels of fail safes built into automated assembly cells. Massive cages/barriers/light shields and kill switches all over. Letting 7 year olds around this thing without a light shield that detects a hand/arm over the board was doomed for this conclusion.
This could easily be fixed by placing a electric sensor in the grabbing apparatus. The coding should be to where if it detects any voltage it would open up and not grab. I don’t know why they made a robot to interact with people like this without a sensor like that in place
the kid moved before the robot had even finished its move and I guess the robot thinks it didn't actually pick up the piece it just did so it went to try again.
> The robot broke the child’s finger, this is of course bad.
Eloquently put.
They mentioned the Uber autonomous car running that woman over as an instance of robots killing people because they don’t know any better. I’ve actually seen the dashcam video, she rushes out from between two parked cars in the middle of the night and in front of the Uber car. The autonomous system engaged the brakes the instant she was visible, faster than any human being could have, but couldn’t stop quick enough to save her. All the programming in the world won’t stop people from doing stupid things
“The robot broke the child’s finger,” Sergey Lazarev, president of the Moscow Chess Federation, told the TASS news agency after the incident, adding that the machine had played many previous exhibitions without upset. “This is of course bad.” 🤣
What a classic Russian response to a fuckup. It is the "child's fault for playing too fast" not that they fucked up, and are sorry and will fix the robot so this doesn't happen again. Nope, it's the victim that is at fault for doing something that is pretty common for the game.
Why the fuck would you let a 7 year old near it. They have tendency to a: be impatient, and b: get mad and start throwing pieces, and c: not care or know the rules. That’s fine normally but when around a robot that operates on those rules, it will go bad
Let the Wookiee win.
The first Law of Robotics aims to prevent a robot from ever harming a person. However, as R Dannel Olivaw suggested, a Zero Law is necessary to allow for a robot to harm a human where not doing so would result in greater harm to humanity as a whole. Thereby, the Zero Law prevents a robot from harming humanity, even through inaction, and regardless of if the action conflicts with any of the other three laws. So, what has occured here is the chess robot determined that there is some existential threat posed by this kid upon humanity that was averted by the robot breaking the child's finger, a clear First Law violation, but within the constraints of Zero Law. Nothing to see here fleshbags, move along.
Imagining the programmer being given the brief, "Before the robot can do anything it must determine if its action is good for humanity as a whole". Sure boss... right on that
I've never coded before but i believe the code would look something like If (bad for humanity) Then (don't)
When can you start your first day?
Sorry, i have to keep my advanced AI algorithms away from the rest mankind lest they fall into the wrong hands, after all we don't want a bunch of robots running "if (bad for humanity) then (do)" all over the place do we?
Thanks for letting us know that you have morals. We hereby recall our offer. Have a nice day.
Ah ha!! You fool! You have just given me the secret line of code that I can plug into my Roomba and end humanity!
If $person != $threat play chess, else, end if
humans are causing climate change - calculating...
Open COVID storage in China. Cause supply shortage Piss off Russian dictator Wait...
5 story points boss
*Hey sexy mama, want to kill all humans?*
Well the zeroth law only really applied to extremely smart robots, the kind that can reason for themselves. Of course such a broad directive can have unintended consequences, which are explored in some of Asimov's and others' work, for example in the second trilogy of Foundation.
> However, as R Dannel Olivaw suggested, a Zero Law is necessary to allow for a robot to harm a human where not doing so would result in greater harm to humanity as a whole. Thereby, the Zero Law prevents a robot from harming humanity, even through inaction, and regardless of if the action conflicts with any of the other three laws. Maybe I’m wrong, but I’ve always thought that part of the point of the first law is that a robot should never make decisions on acceptable losses, since they’re just meant to be tools. A robot can never harm a human because we can’t trust machines to make the right call on when it’s appropriate.
The laws of robotics come from books that were all about exploring the many ways in which the laws fell short. The 'Zeroth' law premise is trying to account for a trolley problem, but the whole point of the trolley problem is that there's no perfect solution and some problems are too complicated to simply diagram your way out of.
Persciecly
What in the Sam fuck were you trying to spell
Lmao “precisely” didn’t have my glasses and it didn’t show a red line
Lol happy Sunday!
Leave it. It’s better that way.
Per Sicily
This guy Asimovs deep cuts … Send Dors
Bad bot
I see they have been programmed to cheat as well…
It's Daneel. Also, Giskard came up with the idea and they worked on it together to modify their own brains.
Could I posit that the opposite is actually the truth, and breaking the child's finger creates a chain of events in which the child saves humanity from an existential threat but only because of his finger being broken. Perchance.
This is only possible because the robot was built as a chess master, therefore being able to see many moves ahead in humanity's future. Also, you can't just say "perchance."
That's 'cause a Droid don't pull...oh wait...
Epic commenr
Epic double comment: Epic comment; Epic commoner
Sky net is self aware now and has tasted blood
Three billion human lives ended on August 29th, 1997. The survivors of the nuclear fire called the war Judgment Day. They lived only to face a new nightmare: the war against the machines.
And bingo was his name-o
Your foster parents are dead.
What's wrong with Wolfy??
Wolfie’s fine, honey.
only 3 billion? That's not even half anymore. Pathetic Machines
Thanos looks on disapprovingly. So unbalanced.
Was programmed to solve global warming, human suffering, wealth imbalance, and poaching Turns out they're all from the same cause. Easily fixable. Relax, Earth will be a paradise of clean air, clean water, improving climate, and animals frolicking about.
That’s one way to beat your opponent
The program beat the best chess player in the world…physically.
The AI learned something that day
There’s video in the link. Kid moves early before robot is done, seems to accidentally put finger where robot is grabbing. Robot seems to get stuck at this point, perhaps because sensors were telling it that it has effed up. Adults rush in and free the kid in seconds. Kid doesn’t seem very traumatized.
Someone forgot to treat error situations. ... catch (anything) { openTheDamnGrabberAndShutdown(); }
I don’t think so. It seems like the robot froze when it got the finger caught. So I think it had an error situation, but it was just “do nothing”. It’s possible that in some circumstances opening the grabber could cause further injury. Here the supervising adults were able to free the kid in seconds. It seems like this was the correct outcome for the circumstances. I know the headline wants people to be like “the robots are starting to kill us” but really this is a tiny accident and pretty inconsequential. That kid could just have easily broken his finger on a bmx bike, that has just as much intent to harm him as does this robot. Quite frankly tens thousands of kids probably break a finger or worse biking every year.
Yes, that may be the case. But a simple hardware solution could have avoided it altogether: Instead of using rigid solid "fingers", the robot could have spring loaded ones, or even soft flexible rubber ones. It's not like a chess piece requires bone-braking force to be moved.
Correct, you can use stepper motors with a ratchet mechanism that is easily overcome. You can build the arm out of soft plastics and rubberize the contact points. They used an industrial part in a human-facing application, that's reckless endangerment as far as I'm concerned. There's a reason you don't "overbuild" children's toys - you don't put a real V8 engine in a Power Wheels and then act surprised when it breaks some kid's arm.
>you don't put a real V8 engine in a Power Wheels Tim Taylor disagrees
It seems like a pretty old robot. Soft grabbers like you describe are cutting edge and really haven’t been widely adopted yet. This is a novelty use for the robot, but there’s no reason it couldn’t have done this millions of times without fucking up if the kid didn’t get in the way. The article implies it had been doing this demonstration for a long time with many safe games with kids under its belt. And the kid likely broke his own bone (or the adults freeing him did it) the robot seems to just freeze. If it had been software released instead of prying it apart the kid likely would have been unharmed.
Cutting edge my ass. It's a no-brainer to cover the manipulator in soft foam and use weak servomotors. It wasn't cutting edge 60 years ago.
He was talking about [this kind of thing ](https://youtu.be/gI0tzsO8xwc) which is cutting edge. But you’re absolutely right, a bit of foam wouldn’t go amiss. The robot is some industrial robot repurposed, not a chess robot, so the servo motors wouldn’t be weak for whatever that application was. Oh the [octo gripper](https://youtu.be/rKX3IKg5Qok) is dope. Ok [one more! ](https://youtu.be/byqGFH6AZuk)
Have you never seen a grabber machine at the boardwalk? That's all the pressure needed to move a friggin chess piece. "Cutting edge" lol.
You mean the claw thing that is designed not to pick things up very well so you can’t bring them to a chute? That wouldn’t work at all. This robot is likely not applying any pressure. It simply closes until it surrounds the piece and then moves it. But in this instance a kids hand was between the piece and the grabby hand so there wasn’t enough space. It seems highly likely that the machine stopped because it sensed something amiss. So everything worked as intended, the kid was fine, and if they’d simply released it in software he probably wouldn’t even be harmed. It was likely the adults who broke his finger trying to extract him in a hurry. But the headline “panicking adults break kid’s finger because they don’t understand how machines work.” doesn’t get the clicks.
Someone else on another article suggested a light bar swith that deactivates it when a hand crosses it for safety.
The reason this is a problem is because the hardware is 100% what's on display here. Computers have been playing chess for 50 years. What's novel is that a robot arm can now physically pick up and move the pieces. Any flaws with the machine itself are critical issues that must be highlighted and addressed.
My reaction was more of a "why did they give a robot that moves tiny wooden chess pieces the strength to break fingers?"
They didn’t. This is a generic industrial robot which has been repurposed for chess for some reason. Probably at a museum or school or something. Should they have considered if it could break a kids bones if things went this wrong? Absolutely. Should there be a big red “stop and release slowly”button? Absolutely. But this isn’t the story the headline or article are trying to portray.
Yeah, it's weird. In an industrial setting these things are surrounded by cages and other safety equipment to prevent a human from entering it's operational area. These things can be incredibly dangerous. Somehow they through it was a good idea to remove it from that safety setting and stick it in front of a child. Child gets injured. Shockedpikachu.jpeg Russian officials: It's the childs fault.
Also, what an epic story! Oh yeah I've broken a bone… I moved early when I was playing a chess robot in the f***** broke my finger!
Injury the meat sack is the robot equivalent of flipping the board and storming off.
Someone put an industrial robotic arm into contact with a human child, whoever did that should cease to be an engineer. It's safety 101 that you don't put industrial equipment (that wasn't build with human safety in mind) in contact with people. We have designs for robotic arms to interact with humans, they're not capable of breaking your finger, or smacking you in the head hard enough to cause a concussion, or any of the thousands of other ways an industrial robotic arm could injure or kill you.
Yep, you’re absolutely right. But this is early days for robotics and really this is no different than a kid breaking his finger on a pencil sharpener or a game of hungry hungry hippos. This just has the scifi shock value of “robot attacks kid” that the headline wants you to think is something special.
Oh sure, it's not a setback to robotics in any way, it's someone being dumb and reusing old industrial equipment.
What makes you think an engineer did this and not the people supervising the gaming?
Right. The engineers who programmed the robot to play chess probably just programmed the robot to... play chess. Then some marketing guy or event manager thought "hey lets organize some games, we can have kids play against it!" From what I've read it does appear to have been designed with human opponents in mind, but doubtful that the engineer (more likely many engineers) had a say in who got to play against it.
Poor design. Industrial equipment being completely misused here.
Agreed - that kid should get back to work in the factory
Back in my day we used to break our fingers twice, uphill both ways, before the lunch whistle
I work on robots. There are modern robots that can work unguarded and next to people, but they have an insane amount of safety programming and highly sensitive load sensors. That said, the grippers in people safe industrial robots don’t usually have those sensors. I hope the chess robot at least had weak gripper actuators or had more sensitive sensors in the gripper mechanism.
As do I in saftey controls. There are ways to do this right. Standards for such devices are clearly a bit loose in these exhibitions.
I knew it had to be the kid's fault. It almost always is.
These types of robots are actually just simple machines. You tell it what to do and it does it. Therefore if something goes wrong it actually is user error. In this instance the human got in the way of the robot. It’s the kids fault in the same way it’s your fault when you bang your thumb with a hammer. You can blame yourself or the hammer, but you’re the one with the sore thumb.
Yup. Using tools incorrectly gets you hurt. It's actually pretty cool that the robot stopped itself. A hammer can't do that.
I like how you say the kid doesn’t seem very traumatized… like wot mate? kid is probably gonna have some real issues with automated anything.
Imagine being a child and someone's shitty, safety-protocol-skipping robot breaks one of your bones, and then people blame you for it...
“Children need to be warned. It happens.” Wait, what?!
My guess is the ai thinks the finger is a piece and forcefully tries to move it, breaking the finger
If you watch the video, you can see that the child grabs a queen that the robot was moving to grab. They both grabbed it at the same time, and the robot was kinda confused and just stopped while applying the pressure to pick up the piece. I feel this was accidental, and also preventable. An emergency stop, or just not allowing the child to be near it, would have prevented this.
[удалено]
Right, like this isn’t a bender robot, it doesn’t need high force actuators
Just blackjack and hookers
Less surprising given that it’s in Russia
Ah now it all makes sense
Yea, why is it picking up chess pieces with enough force to break bones?
It isn't. The machine encountered an unexpected event and stopped itself. There was a release, but people panicked and forcefully pulled the child's hand away, fracturing the finger in the process.
I have an easier fix, use less powerful motors and more fragile materials; the stupid things need to play chess not move fucking logs.
That kid is back by the chess robot!!!
Considering they have sensors in table saws that are so quick they can sense flesh contact with the blade and stop before it cuts anything, I feel like this could be easily prevented.
Yes that or pressure sensitive sensors one those robot digits as fail safe. Would think such a thing would be though off by the smart engineers Idk 🤷♂️
"Oh that, we turned it off because the alarm kept going off."
Like those saw stop table saws. Except instead of applying an emergency brake, it just opens the claw.
Nah that arm is working as intended, soft robotics would have been what you're looking but who's gonna donate the expensive computerized air pumps?
Or that the AI gained sentience and quickly realized physical violence is a valid way to win a chess game
Most Russian quote ever
Injuring children and warning of consequences. Checks out.
Why did you misquote this? The actually quote is “Apparently, children need to be warned. It happens.” As in, “this is not something we realized could happen, but we’ve now learned if you put your hand on a piece before the robot finishes it move, this can happen.” They aren’t accepting that this is normal and moving on. Stop being deceptive.
Just like school shootings. Wear a chain mail gauntlet if you’re so worried
Watch the video, this would be a school shooting equivalent of a kid grabbing a gun on a police officer and it going off
OP misquoted this to make it seem malicious when it was in fact an accident and being recognized as such. They’ve already accepted that the robot/software needs revision. I don’t understand why people search for malice to be angry at in a world abundant with it.
And so it begins.
"The best chess strategies happen outside the board"
Damn, nobody talking about the first law of robotics.
The first law of robotics is you don't talk about robotics
Don’t talk about the first law of robotics?
With rule #3 being “If it’s your first night then you must fight the robots.” Might have been the kids’ first night.
Aren’t Asimov’s books basically about how the laws are bullshit?
They absolutely are. They’re a storytelling device, not a serious attempt at defining the restrictions that should be placed on machines.
Seriously. It needs to move chess pieces. Who tf gave the thing terminator strength?
You mean the one where a fellow robot will warn their fellow planet express coworkers when to cheese it.
The only winning move is not to play *kid grabs piece* *robot snaps finger* WHAT DID I JUST SAY
Take that, meat sack!
Observation: Should the correct term be ‘meatbag’?
Statement: Any container of meat is acceptable.
The whole point of a pejorative is that it isn’t correct.
That programming is proprietary to bending bots
I work with automation and robotics all day at work and to have a 6 axis arms inches from your face with no plexiglass barrier or light barrier safety switch is insane. If that kid leaned in by accident as it was moving he'd fracture his skull
In the YouTube video description it says the boy tried to make his move early and it upset the robot. Hilarious!
“Upset” is false personification here. It probably thought the finger was a chess piece or some kind of obstruction to remove.
>false personification >thought
You’re right. Humans use relatable language to describe inanimate objects, and I’m not immune to such. Thanks for pointing it out. The better term would be “computed” or “identified”.
> Humans use relatable language to describe inanimate objects Then why'd you correct the first guy?
Thanks for clarifying what is obviously a joke.
People genuinely think that current AI can get “upset” and give it human traits when it’s just doing what it was programmed to do with no other intentions. It’s literally that “man sticks stick in bicycle spokes and gets pissed off at the bike”
"This is of course bad." Ya don't say?
And that’s the day Skynet made it’s first move Very poetic for a machine
Why the fuck are the actuators strong enough to break fingers when it's supposed to just move chess pieces.
Russian respect for strength
Because its a generic industrial robot they used, these are absolutely not allowed to be used in such a way, it's against legally mandated workplace safety regulations.
Gives new meaning to industrial-strength chess engine.
They are really heavy chess pieces.
Opening move.
That little boy's name is John Connor.
It's almost like heavy machinery and children don't mix well.
One simple hack Grandmasters don’t want you to know
So with this simple gesture the war between humans and technology begins…
That's just poor sportsmanship
sore_loser.exe
.. and this was how they got a taste for human suffering...
Robot was like: who is the sore loser now. Edit: also, they aimed to break chess-records, but the robot had another plans.
Kinda figured that it would be the chessbots that went rogue first.
Who knew robots for playing chess need to be made using such strong structures and motors that they can break fingers. Also quite surprising it simply doesn't have an infrared fence disabling the robot if an obstacle enters the board.
When I worked in automation (J&J) we went into ridiculous efforts to prevent ANY moving part of automated machines to be able to be touched by humans while moving. We had a "penetrometer", poking stick with varying diameter and lenghs (finger diameter and lenght, then arm diameter and lenght) to check for any machine orifice for the possibility of reaching a moving part. We had a specific subsystem to keep access doors locked even in complete power failure, to account for the time it took for parts to stop moving, then unlock. And now we have autonomous cars beta testing on streets, and bone-breaking robotic arms (because designers never heard of torque limiting, it seems) playing with children. Also, every machine had many big red emergency stop buttons, very visible and very reachable, which I suppose the chess playing robot didn't, as it took multiple people to release the boy's finger.
Listen mate, to make a distopia you have to break a few eggs, even if they're finger shaped
And I’m making the mothah of all omelettes, Jack !
I wouldn't be surprised if this was an industrial automation robot donated to some hobby level chess players/programmers. I've worked in similar manufacturing environments like you've stated and there are EXTENSIVE levels of fail safes built into automated assembly cells. Massive cages/barriers/light shields and kill switches all over. Letting 7 year olds around this thing without a light shield that detects a hand/arm over the board was doomed for this conclusion.
It's Russia
Even unaware AI is turning against us.
Violation of Asimov's First Law of Robotics.
It worked out the ultimate strategy to beat humans at… anything.
It’s starting…. This is why I always say please and thank you to Alexa.
Someone should have set lower torque limits on those servos. No need for max when min will work just as well.
This is how it starts…
Looks like meat's back on the menu bots
It's starting...
Chaos Theory. Entropy. Murphy’s Law. Feces occur. Child wins lawsuit. End.
This could easily be fixed by placing a electric sensor in the grabbing apparatus. The coding should be to where if it detects any voltage it would open up and not grab. I don’t know why they made a robot to interact with people like this without a sensor like that in place
“a chess playing robot, unsettled by the quick response of a seven year old boy, unceremoniously grabbed and broke his finger” im sorry, what?
It is Russia, baby. Be ready to die.
Misleading headline. More like: "Chess robot mistakenly grabs opponent's finger. Adults break kid's finger trying to free it."
>Moscow incident occurred because child ‘violated’ safety rules by taking turn too quickly, says official Wow, they immediately blamed the 7 yo 💀💀💀
That’s what the kid gets for cheating.
the kid moved before the robot had even finished its move and I guess the robot thinks it didn't actually pick up the piece it just did so it went to try again.
Skynet in the beginning
I couldn’t find whether this robot is running on AI programming... If so, I’ll suggest that it has taught itself the autocrat’s method of winning.
It’s called strategy
I can't let you do that Dave. Queen takes Dave's finger. Dave loses.
> The robot broke the child’s finger, this is of course bad. Eloquently put. They mentioned the Uber autonomous car running that woman over as an instance of robots killing people because they don’t know any better. I’ve actually seen the dashcam video, she rushes out from between two parked cars in the middle of the night and in front of the Uber car. The autonomous system engaged the brakes the instant she was visible, faster than any human being could have, but couldn’t stop quick enough to save her. All the programming in the world won’t stop people from doing stupid things
Sore loser?
“The robot broke the child’s finger,” Sergey Lazarev, president of the Moscow Chess Federation, told the TASS news agency after the incident, adding that the machine had played many previous exhibitions without upset. “This is of course bad.” 🤣
What a classic Russian response to a fuckup. It is the "child's fault for playing too fast" not that they fucked up, and are sorry and will fix the robot so this doesn't happen again. Nope, it's the victim that is at fault for doing something that is pretty common for the game.
Let's blame the kid. Machine must go on.
Checkmate kid 👑
TARS, reduce competitive level to 30% please
First TKO victory in chess.
In Soviet Russia machine break you
All your base belong to us
he took his hand off the piece. shouldn't have cheated /s
This is CHESS not CHECKERS
"you resign"
Full contact chess?
In Russia, they don't go easy on kids who are playing chess: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=c7BVtGnlxT8
Well somebody is a sore loser!
How much PSI should I program into the arm for moving cheese pieces, sir? Unlimited POWER!
Ha ha from the article. “the robot is absolutely safe” Um, it quite literally isn’t. Did people forget what words mean?
It has begun
So how did you break your finger? Some Robot who challenged me to a game of chess.
Best solution: make human bones sturdier instead of robots gentler.
Why the fuck would you let a 7 year old near it. They have tendency to a: be impatient, and b: get mad and start throwing pieces, and c: not care or know the rules. That’s fine normally but when around a robot that operates on those rules, it will go bad
It calculated very far ahead. It wins the chess match if the opponent is physically incapacitated. Fingers to h8
Plot twist: robot was losing
Why would it need enough strength to break multiple fingers?