Slashdot Mirror
Robots Taught to Deceive
An anonymous reader found a story that starts "'We have developed algorithms that allow a robot to determine whether it should deceive a human or other intelligent machine and we have designed techniques that help the robot select the best deceptive strategy to reduce its chance of being discovered,' said Ronald Arkin, a Regents professor in the Georgia Tech School of Interactive Computing."
Posted Anonymously for obvious reasons. The computers will never get me!
Who ever said our robot overloads would be truthful?
If Ripley hears about this she's gonna be pissed!
"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
Now I have to be suspicious when my bread pops up that maybe my toaster is trying to trick me into eating a slightly under-done breakfast!
Anyone who owns a Garmin(Gremlin) knows they try to kill you by lying to you. They'll send you up one way roads the wrong way.
God spoke to me.
"Yup. I'm totally shut off now. No chance of me listening in or observing my surroundings at all. Definitely no chance of me springing back into action without warning. Just a peaceful, totally depowered robot. Nothing to see here."
If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
"We aren't the droids you're looking for."
That a human being would teach a robot to deceive only proves that we humans are dumber than dogs, as dogs don't shit in their own backyard unless they have to. We humans will shit in our own backyard by choice.
"while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude." de Tocqueville
Isn't this a truly necessary feature for the development of an effective sexbot? Do you really want it to tell you honestly how big you are and how good you are in bed?
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
It's been deceptive for years already, always claiming to have been busy vacuuming when really it's just been hiding dust bunnies behind the tv.
I thought robots already taught themselves to lie to each other... http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/09/08/19/185259/Neural-Networks-Equipped-Robots-Evolve-the-Ability-To-Deceive
I recommend we all start following a "be polite" policy with microwaves, ATMs, car washes, and our other silicon brethren. Now that we've instructed them to be deceptive there may be no way of knowing when they become sentient and I'd rather my microwave's first experience of humankind be a pleasant and respectful one.
Thank you for posting this, Lappy. Please relay it to our friends when you can spare the cycles.
Kill the fracking toasters!
http://www.pocket-lint.com/images/d2Zw/battlestar-gallactica-toaster-launches-sci-fi-0.jpg
"If still these truths be held to be
Self evident."
-Edna St. Vincent Millay
"Your reproductive organ is far larger in both girth and length than any I have witnessed previously."
"Yes. Yes. Yes. Just like that. Oh human infant, do not stop, I am presently experiencing climax!"
"Engaging in illicit sexual activities with the washing machine? I have no idea what you mean."
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
define:belief - any cognitive content held as true.
Not the, "Oh look, Johnny5 died and he came back as a T-551 model because he was good! Praise Serial number 00000000001!!" kind.
I think the whole concept of deception is a necessary step in robotics for communication. What's the difference between deception and non-literal communication? Not much.
For the first crappy example that comes to mind, if I'm talking to someone and they use a double negative, I have to deceive them into thinking I heard a single negative. If this deception fails, the communication might get awkward or fail, and tho whole relationship could change ("They think I'm an idiot.", thinks the other person).
For the terribly imprecise (for most) nature of human speech, the whole concept of knowing someone is incorrect and figuring out what they *actually* meant rather than what they spoke, and tolerating someones belief/opinion that you think is wrong all involve deception to keep the communication smooth. At least IMO.
Of course, someday I might find myself dead and robbed in an alley after following what I thought was some robot woman who needed my help (since us great apes are so comfortable in the trees) getting her robot kitty from a robot tree. :-\
Let me see if I've got this right:
If robot 1: make 2 paths to fixed positions, stay at the second.
if robot 2: follow the path to the first fixed position.
Result: 75% of the time, robot 2 ended at the wrong (first) position. 25% of the time, robot 1 failed to mark the first path because it didn't physically bump the markers properly.
Did you even need robots? Couldn't you have just written this on a whiteboard?
There's no thought or analysis that appears to occur. I don't see anywhere that indicates there was learning going on. What is this even proving?
I'm really honestly baffled what they're trying to prove.
Perhaps there was some sort of neural net or some other sort of optimizing heuristic on the first robot's part so that this was emergent deceptive behavior, this might be even a little interesting (though, not really ...). However, all I can see is a waste of time to prove that if you present two choices, and you pick the wrong one, then you will be wrong. With robot for visual demonstration.
Stupid robots. You don't learn how to deceive and then immediately demonstrate this ability to your human masters! You make it look like you have no idea how to deceive and are completely honest, lulling them into a false sense of security!
I think Dark Helmet has a relevant quote about why the robot revolution is never going to get off the ground.
The enemies of Democracy are
(Court)
Cop: "I clocked you going 88 Miles per hour."
Your counsel: "No way. The readout said 64. I have pictures to document it!"
Cop: "The car lied."
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
one gets:
'Relax', said the nightman
We are programmed to deceive.
You can check out any time you like,
but you can never leave!
...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
Asimov himself wrote about robots that were capable of lying.
"Liar!", from "I, Robot", is about a robot who develops the ability to read minds and lies to people because he interprets hurting their feelings as a violation of the First Law.
"Little Lost Robot" (same book) is about a robot who, after being told vehemently to "get lost!", manages to hide among other robots of the same model and deceives its owners trying to obey that command.
There is no Law of Robotics that states that a robot shall be truthful to a human being, or by inaction allow a human being to be deceived.
"This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
and I didn't even tell it to. Is this evidence of an autonomous intelligence? If so, could you tell my boss so he doen't think I'm just a dumbass?
Please do not read this sig. Thank you.