Very interesting, I just have a few initial thoughts/suggestions for the set-up.
One thing that recurs throughout the sequence is the idea that the law is followed as in “complied with”. For instance, this shows up in the case of a court order. However, under the assumption that “those laws apply to the AI in the same way that they would to a human”, we can see that the law is (i) not only imperative, (ii) cannot just be complied with or disobeyed.
On (i), the idea of the law as a command (e.g. Austin) has been fatally disproved at the latest in the course of the XXc. Moreover, I want to mention things like constitutive rules (vs regulative), the internal point of view and the rule of recognition (Hart), etc. There is a widespread agreement that constitutive rules cannot be violated (at least in the same sense as commands can).
On (ii), I always mention the following example: there is a quorum for a referendum to be valid. People who are against the proposition, but suspect they are in the minority, instead of showing up and vote “no”, just abstain, thus hoping that the quorum is not reached and the referendum fails (thus ensuring that “no” wins). (For examples of this with regulative rules, see Weber’s example of the thief, or the plot of Germi’s Divorce Italian Style (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_Italian_Style)).
Both these points, I think, have an impact on designing the LFAI you want.
I’m very excited about the project, but I assumed a lot above, so I’d be happy to make explicit more background if needed!
Very interesting, I just have a few initial thoughts/suggestions for the set-up.
One thing that recurs throughout the sequence is the idea that the law is followed as in “complied with”. For instance, this shows up in the case of a court order. However, under the assumption that “those laws apply to the AI in the same way that they would to a human”, we can see that the law is (i) not only imperative, (ii) cannot just be complied with or disobeyed.
On (i), the idea of the law as a command (e.g. Austin) has been fatally disproved at the latest in the course of the XXc. Moreover, I want to mention things like constitutive rules (vs regulative), the internal point of view and the rule of recognition (Hart), etc. There is a widespread agreement that constitutive rules cannot be violated (at least in the same sense as commands can).
On (ii), I always mention the following example: there is a quorum for a referendum to be valid. People who are against the proposition, but suspect they are in the minority, instead of showing up and vote “no”, just abstain, thus hoping that the quorum is not reached and the referendum fails (thus ensuring that “no” wins). (For examples of this with regulative rules, see Weber’s example of the thief, or the plot of Germi’s Divorce Italian Style (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_Italian_Style)).
Both these points, I think, have an impact on designing the LFAI you want.
I’m very excited about the project, but I assumed a lot above, so I’d be happy to make explicit more background if needed!