Slashdot Mirror


Do Robots Need Passports? Should They?

Hallie Siegel writes: With countries evolving different regulations over robotic devices, law professor Anupam Chander looks into whether robots crossing borders will need passports, and what the role of international trade law should be in regulating the flow of these devices. Fascinating discussion on what happens when technology like robots crosses over international borders, as part of this year's We Robot conference in Seattle.

164 comments

  1. pass the weed you hog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    do androids dream ?

    1. Re:pass the weed you hog by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      And what would androids dream about? Electric sheep?

    2. Re:pass the weed you hog by Whiteox · · Score: 1

      Don't be a Dick......

      --
      Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
    3. Re:pass the weed you hog by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      What do you have against dicks? You probably don't like languages with dick typing.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    4. Re:pass the weed you hog by Whiteox · · Score: 1

      Hahahaha! Made my day. Thanks.

      --
      Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
  2. Will the robots need passports? by rmdingler · · Score: 1
    Sure.

    Directly after the first incident. Don't kid yourself, if it can be used malevolently, it certainly will be.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:Will the robots need passports? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Now all they need is a way is to uniquely identify a robot in a way that can't be forged so that a passport can only apply to one specific robot. A picture of it isn't exactly going to fly, nor will a serial number that can be physically altered, nor an ID chip that can be changed or replaced. Unless they're talking about a single national certification for an entire model range rather than individuals.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    2. Re:Will the robots need passports? by AK+Marc · · Score: 3

      But what is a passport? It's proof of citizenship. Giving robots passports would convey upon them rights and responsibilities.

      Now, requiring import duties and restrictions on munitions doesn't have any "human" implications, and was used against lots of military tech previously.

    3. Re:Will the robots need passports? by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, no kidding. Bill of lading or customs form.

      Passport, not so much.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    4. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're talking about practical difficulties in implementation. Those are non-trivial, but they're independent of the "should?" question.

    5. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      always cost - benefit to these decisions - but the answer is no anyway.

    6. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Beck_Neard · · Score: 1

      You're confusing passports with visas.

      A passport is nothing but a document specifying the owner's nationality.

      It's a visa which allows you to enter a country. Now, many countries have visa waiver programs that allow passport holders from certain countries to enter without a visa. But such waivers may not always apply (for instance, if you stay over a certain period of time, you will need to apply for a visa).

      --
      A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
    7. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Beck_Neard · · Score: 2

      It most certainly is not. A passport is proof of nationality, not citizenship - two very different legal concepts.

      There are many people right now who, for instance, are US nationals but not citizens. They have US passports but do not have the rights of a citizen i.e. they can't vote, participate in elections, etc.

      --
      A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
    8. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Until AI gets a lot better I fail to see how the problem posed is any different from me being in China and posting to an American website. I don't need a passport to do that, so why would a robot.

      Now, when robots gain AI sufficient to operate on their own, we will probably have to revisit this.

    9. Re:Will the robots need passports? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      It most certainly is not. A passport is proof of nationality, not citizenship - two very different legal concepts.

      http://www.uscis.gov/us-citize... "Your U.S. passport is your best proof of U.S. citizenship."

      You might want to convince the governments of the world that they are all wrong and you are right.

      There are many people right now who, for instance, are US nationals but not citizens. They have US passports but do not have the rights of a citizen i.e. they can't vote, participate in elections, etc.

      Yeah, they are called felons. They are citizens, just not humans anymore.

    10. Re:Will the robots need passports? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Yeah, let's hope by then humans become intelligent enough to tear down the borders.. What kind of crap is this? Some bureaucrat feels threatened by automation?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    11. Re: Will the robots need passports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they're talking about people from eg American Samoa.

    12. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Beck_Neard · · Score: 1

      That has nothing at all to do with what I'm saying, as it's targeted to a very specific group of people. By international law, simply holding a passport is no proof of citizenship.

      > Yeah, they are called felons. They are citizens, just not humans anymore.

      I'm not talking about felons. I'm talking about the pacific US territories/islands.

      God damn, man. Stop advertising your ignorance so loudly.

      --
      A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
    13. Re:Will the robots need passports? by kencurry · · Score: 1

      For many countries, the passport stamp is your tourist visa.

      But back on topic, Does my weedwacker need a passport? Does my electric razor need a passport? WTF would my robot need a passport?

      --
      sigs are for losers (except to point out that sigs are for losers)
    14. Re: Will the robots need passports? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Nope, a US passport is proof of US citizenship, according to US Customer and Immigration.

    15. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Beck_Neard · · Score: 2

      > But back on topic, Does my weedwacker need a passport? Does my electric razor need a passport? WTF would my robot need a passport?

      Giving robots literaly passports is silly, of course. I think the point is: do robots need special rules regulating their entry into different countries and would it be useful to use existing rules regarding human travel as a template. As robots become more sophisticated and human-like I think it's a perfectly valid question, but maybe not at the moment.

      --
      A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
    16. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Beck_Neard · · Score: 1

      s/literaly/literal

      --
      A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
    17. Re:Will the robots need passports? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      By international law, simply holding a passport is no proof of citizenship.

      Then quote that law. I quoted the US Customs and Immigration, and they differ from your opinion. So post something other than your unsubstantiated opinion.

      Quit asserting I'm wrong, and prove it.

      http://travel.state.gov/conten...

      The US goverment makes it quite clear you are an ignorant liar. There exist non-citizen passports. They are separate documents and aren't full passports. Anyone talking about "passports" isn't talking about refugee travel papers, non-citizen passports, or other non-passport travel documents.

      You've heard of some exception that affects a few people, and think that makes you smart. But not being able to understand the general application of them, or the meanings of the rules around them.


      As I've said, and you've never proven otherwise, a "full" passport (not a limited non-citizen passport, or other edge exceptions), is proof of citizenship.

      If you could prove otherwise, you would, rather than lying to assert without proof, a stance that's been proven wrong with multiple cites of US policy on this matter.

    18. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Beck_Neard · · Score: 2

      All of that is completely irrelevant because, as I said (this is the THIRD time I'm saying this) I'm talking about international law, not any specifics that may or may not apply to US passport holders.

      Look up the definition of 'passport' in the New Oxford Companion to Law, or "Passports and Nationality in International Law" by Adam Muchmore (section IV. "The Passport in International Law").

      But please, keep on plucking that chicken. You're just making a mockery of yourself. I'm not even sure what the point is to your rants.

      --
      A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
    19. Re:Will the robots need passports? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      This is a US site. US Passports prove citizenship.

      What are you on about regarding the irrelevant rant you are off on? Link or it doesn't exist. You've not given a link. I have.

    20. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Passports prove citizenship except for the passports that are for non-citizens, and people in other countries who hold a passport and are not citizens of that country. So obviously the concept of a passport logically speaking does not imply citizenship whereas a regular US passport might imply citizenship to the United States. Now, the article is about if robots should have passports. Let's say the question was "Should non-citizens get passports", would you say that passports imply citizenship, or would you say "oh, maybe some kind of passport that doesn't confer citizenship would be useful?" Since we already have those, it is reasonable to assume that we could make another class of passport for robots that doesn't imply citizenship, but you're all caught up on it.

      Not only are you wrong about how to interpret English, but you're arguing a stupid point and generally being a dicklips, dicklips.

    21. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Required+Snark · · Score: 1
      John Oliver on the citizenship issue in Puerot Rico, Guam and American Samoa.

      According to Oliver, there are 4.1 million people living in Puerto Rico and the island territories. Of that population, 98.4% are racial or ethnic minorities, none of whom have the right to vote in U.S. elections. According to Oliver, the more you look into the reasons that the U.S. territories don’t have voting rights, the harder it is to understand why these dated laws have not been changed.

      Way back in 1901, it was said that the island territories were inhabited by “alien races” that couldn’t “understand Anglo-Saxon principles” and thus were denied the vote. That hasn’t changed, despite the fact that even at the time, American legal thinkers thought that the territories’ lack of voting power should only last for a limited time. Fast forward 114 years and the U.S. citizens living on these territories still can’t vote, which Oliver compares to failing to update your computer operating system for over a millennium.

      But Puerto Rico is lucky compared to some of the other U.S. territories. American Samoans aren’t even automatically granted U.S. citizenship, which, according to Oliver, renders the “American” part as moot as the phrases “social media expert” or “People’s Choice Award nominee.” Instead, they’re considered U.S. nationals, but not citizens.

      Over on Guam, 27% of the island is occupied by U.S. Navy and Air Force bases, and a staggering high number of Guam citizens are veterans of the U.S. military, but they still have no voting rights. Despite that, Guam holds a straw poll every presidential election and has higher voter turn-out than any other U.S. state — you know, the ones whose votes actually count.

      Funny and painful, as usual.

      --
      Why is Snark Required?
    22. Re:Will the robots need passports? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Passports prove citizenship except for the passports that are for non-citizens, and people in other countries who hold a passport and are not citizens of that country

      Such passports are "travel documents" and marked to show that they are limited, thus not full passports.

      So obviously the concept of a passport logically speaking does not imply citizenship whereas a regular US passport might imply citizenship to the United States.

      If the US passport proves US citizenship, and is *always* taken as such by the US government, I've proven my point. I've yet to see a non-citizen passport that doesn't clearly indicate such. If you can't prove the existance of them, then you are complaining, but not arguing.

      Prove me wrong. If I'm wrong, it should be easy.

      But nobody can prove me wrong. Either that makes those arguing with me idiots, or wrong.

      Yes, a passport could, in theory, prove residency without citizenship, but in practice, doesn't. It's illegal for a country to deliberately take an action they know would make someone stateless, so the passport a person should have should always be from the country of citizenship.

      In theory, I understand it is not a strict requirement. Though, in US law, it is. And I know of no exceptions.

      And nobody can provide any exceptions. Except the lying Beck_Neard who stated the exceptions for some US territories. But I quoted the US government outlining that a passport proves citizenship, and that the "exception" gets a limited passport that isn't a full passport, and is stamped as such.

      So come on, prove me wrong. Or waste my time with more distractions and irrelevancies.

    23. Re: Will the robots need passports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Puerto Rico has chosen not to become a state. They could easily become a state by finishing the requirements, but to this day they have decided not to. They aren't full citizens because they don't want to become full citizens.

      I'm not sure how it's our fault that the Peurto Ricans have voted against state hood. I can't recall where exactly they have left it, but it's not some sort of a conspiracy. Americans have to be naturalized unless they are born in America or have a parent that is. Special rules for areas that opt out of statehood make no sense.

    24. Re:Will the robots need passports? by DickBreath · · Score: 1

      > what is a passport? It's proof of citizenship

      A passport is proof of ownership. Sort of like how a company puts a 'property of' sticker on a computer. But maybe my definition of passport is totally consistent with yours if you assume citizenship == subject of the realm == ownership.

      --

      I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
    25. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Phreakiture · · Score: 1

      That's very true, but it is an interesting question.

      Now, the further question that comes to mind is whether or not some circumstances might invalidate the passport. Is it still valid if the software is patched (probably)? What if it is upgraded to the next major rev (a bit fuzzier)? How about if the software is erased and replaced (maybe the does the equivalent of installing Linux)? What if the hardware get accessorized or customized? What if parts are salvaged from two different robots to build a third, essentially different one? Etc.

      None of these things are out of the realm of the likely. A robot is just a mobile computer with the ability to move something. All of these things that the tech-savvy do to their computers, so . . . why wouldn't these things be done to a robot?

      --
      www.wavefront-av.com
    26. Re:Will the robots need passports? by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

      Mod parent up.

      This sums up the entire (idiotic) debate about machines.

    27. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not even about malevolence; it's about anything and everything for which governments regulate peoples' behavior. Doing bad things (weakly regulated as prohibition) is just a ridiculously tiny subset of all that.

      If you are not allowed to buy guns in Texas, trade 'em for cocaine down south, come back to Texas and repeat, then a tradebot won't be allowed to do that, either.

      Ok, perhaps a tradebot is just a human trader's agent, so the regulation already falls under human regulation. But strong AI might invalidate that, or even without AI, the agency might be too hard to trace. ("Whose robot are you?" "Fuck off, copper, I ain't no snitch.")

    28. Re: Will the robots need passports? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      In Puerto Rico, it comes down to taxes. Currently, they get all the benefits of paying federal taxes (infrastructure, military, etc), but they don't pay federal income tax. If they become a state, they have to start paying income taxes.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    29. Re:Will the robots need passports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But nobody can prove me wrong.

      That's because you keep screaming that non-citizen passports don't count as passports because passports are proof of citizenship blah blah blah.

      8/8 gr8 b8 m8.

    30. Re:Will the robots need passports? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      So you are saying that a learner/restricted driver's license is a "real" driver's license, and the restrictions have no effect on the validity, use, and responsibilities of the driver's license.

      "Passport" exclusively means a full passport, unless otherwise stated. That's how the US government treats it, as I've posted plenty of links previously to. But no, your "nuh uh" trumps all world governments, and you've found nothing that contradicts me, other than your opinion.

    31. Re: Will the robots need passports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      From what I've heard, that's a good thing for the GOP, as PR is liberal enough to potentially disrupt national elections.

  3. Of course they do... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...at least for tax reasons.

    Their value is naturally too high, the age to low to fly under the radar. So be prepared to prove where/ when you bought it at the border controls and that you'll take it back out of the country again.

  4. robots will need more than a passport by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    but that won't stop them.

    1. Re:robots will need more than a passport by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Funny

      but that won't stop them.

      Not if they have a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range.

    2. Re:robots will need more than a passport by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Ahem, that was a cyborg.....

      --
      Good-bye
    3. Re:robots will need more than a passport by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      Not if they have a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range.

      So, a dim lightbulb, in other words?

      Someone should really consider getting a slightly technical person to vet screenwriters when they start using technical terms. As is, the words they put in characters' mouths frequently makes them look stupid....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re: robots will need more than a passport by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A plasma rifle would fire plasma, not just keep it lit in a bulb. The plasma in a light bulb could fuck you up pretty good, but once the bulb pops it's gone, so it can't really get to you.
      Now, what were you bitching about again? Oh yes, fantasy. Get over it.

    5. Re:robots will need more than a passport by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 3, Informative

      Not if they have a phased plasma rifle in the 40 watt range.

      So, a dim lightbulb, in other words?

      If you broadcast in an unfocused spherical pattern, 40 watts will do no harm. In a tight beam, even 1 watt can blind you and burn skin. But they cannot light up the moon.

    6. Re:robots will need more than a passport by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So, a dim lightbulb, in other words?

      Still not necessarily harmless. DVD burner lasers typically operate in the 400mw range and can pop balloons, cut through electricians tape, and can readily set dark coloured paper on fire (as well as causing permanent blindness). Multiply that by 100 and I think you'll be looking at some serious damage. I know that lasers and plasma are two completely different things, but the two should be roughly analogous for power output comparisons. Remember, you are not trying to cut through a wall or anything, just an ugly bag of mostly water (STng: "Home Soil"). Can you say steam explosion? I knew you could.

    7. Re: robots will need more than a passport by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With a 40 watt lightbulb you can read a book. With a 40 watt laser you can burn a hole through the book and anyone reading it.

    8. Re:robots will need more than a passport by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      Instead of talking about the power requirements, I've had a different question nagging me for a few decades: Some plasma guns fire straighter than others, thanks to rifling?

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    9. Re:robots will need more than a passport by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't sound completely implausible to me. I suppose it may depend on how you define a plasma gun, but if it is like a gun, but fires bits of plasma instead of bullets, then why not? If it somehow generates the plasma outside the gun, then I don't see how rifling would work in that case.

    10. Re:robots will need more than a passport by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Some plasma guns fire straighter than others, thanks to rifling?

      Correct. They use spintronics.

  5. Here's a better question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Should a passport be required to tele-operate a complex robot in another country?
    If I strap myself into a sensory exoskeleton and tele-operate a humanoid robot in another place, that's basically the same thing as teleporting me to that other place. I can act as if I were physically present there.

    1. Re:Here's a better question by spiritplumber · · Score: 1

      I couldn't get a Russian visa in time to give a lecture, so we used a telepresence rig that we built. This is already here....

      --
      Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
    2. Re:Here's a better question by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      There's a joke in there somewhere, I just can't find it.

    3. Re:Here's a better question by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      There's a joke in there somewhere, I just can't find it.

      In Soviet Russia, jokes find you.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:Here's a better question by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      It's not a black and white thing.

      At the one extreme you have no telepresense at all. At the other extreme you have telepresense so good that you can operate with a high degree of autonomy in the target country. Right now we are somewhere in between, specific tasks can be done remotely but someone local has to set the equipment up for the specific task and give you access to it.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    5. Re:Here's a better question by 91degrees · · Score: 1

      You wouldn't download a human...

      It's an interesting thought. The thing is, while you are in the country, you are also in another country at the same time.

      It actually makes me think the requirement for a passport in the first place is a bit odd.

    6. Re:Here's a better question by Sloppy · · Score: 1

      It actually makes me think the requirement for a passport in the first place is a bit odd.

      Sshhhhh! [waving arms frantically] Stop asking questions!

      --
      As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
  6. Export license by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Why not just an import/export license?

  7. No by bugs2squash · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Just 3D print a new one with the right "nationality" on the other side of the border.

    --
    Nullius in verba
    1. Re:No by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      In the world we've got, though? Probably not such a bad idea.

      Yeah, right after I need a passport for my laptop.

    2. Re:No by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      It's more likely the control software that would need a "passport", or "export controls". Specifically, robots that are designed to harm humans or do certain things that are illegal in that country (flying over military installations etc.) might not be allowed through customs.

      There has been talk of requiring drones in the US to avoid airports, military bases and certain government installations such as the White House. An imported drone might not take notice of those rules, just like an imported aircraft might not be certified to operate in US airspace.

      TFA is crap, but this is an issue that needs to be considered.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  8. The metal detector could be a problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just got this picture of a queue of T101s getting caught in the metal detector at LAX.

    1. Re:The metal detector could be a problem... by godel_56 · · Score: 1

      I just got this picture of a queue of T101s getting caught in the metal detector at LAX.

      . . . with a bottle of water!

  9. Should people need passports? by presidenteloco · · Score: 1

    Or just an identity check using a neural-response scan while certain questions are being asked:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    --

    Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
  10. Better question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Do humans need passports?

    1. Re:Better question by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Yes, to enslave them, you have detain them and restrict their freedom of movement.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:Better question by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Yes, to enslave them, you have detain them and restrict their freedom of movement.

      Indeed, if there were no passports I could freely visit Syria and North Korea.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    3. Re:Better question by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Beats locking them in. Borders are prison walls.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  11. Military Cyborg! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You are not authorized to operate in this area!

    https://youtu.be/QLL3MVki46U?t=48m24s

  12. The first question by nytes · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This question seems to suggest a question that may have to be answered first: Would robots be considered citizens of a country?

    If so, now we're also talking about the rights of said citizens.

    --
    -- I have monkeys in my pants.
    1. Re:The first question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      This question seems to suggest a question that may have to be answered first: Would robots be considered citizens of a country?

      If so, now we're also talking about the rights of said citizens.

      Until we have sentient, self-aware AI, the whole discussion is ridiculous. My laptop does not need a passport, neither does my shaver.

    2. Re: The first question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm 100% against equal rights for robots.

    3. Re:The first question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are cars considered citezens? Geez guys. Cars and robots are property, things, untill AI gains sentience these questions are useless. That won't happen any time soon. Also, cats and dogs are sentient, but also property, they don't need passports. They might run away and roam to another country, as could robots, but then that would be the owners problem.

    4. Re:The first question by houghi · · Score: 1

      Perhaps first sort out and see that the current rights of the current citizens are not only well defined, but also respected. Not only by law, but by intention as well. (Looking at you every country in the world)

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
  13. Not yet by penguinoid · · Score: 1

    For now, they are just machines.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    1. Re:Not yet by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Robots are people, my friend.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    2. Re:Not yet by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Only if they incorporate...

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  14. My toaster and laptop don't need passports. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    See subject.

    Why the hell would _any_ electro-mechanical device be different?????

    They're tools, not sentient beings. Get over it you techno-fappers.

    1. Re:My toaster and laptop don't need passports. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. And stop with all the "artificial intelligence" crap too. We don't have AI. We aren't any closer to AI now versus 1970. We probably will never have AI. So just stop.

  15. Of all the stupid shit... by Mr.+Freeman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is perhaps the dumbest thing that's been posted to Slashdot this week. Robot passports? Are you fucking serious?

    --
    -1 disagree is not a modifier for a reason. -1 troll, flaimbait, redundant, overrated are NOT acceptable substitutes.
    1. Re:Of all the stupid shit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... Are you fucking serious?

      It's a click-bait article because it use human terms on machines. IE anthropomorphism. But the heart of the matter remains: How do we identify mobile machines? Cars, planes and boats are mobile machines that people want to identify too. It's done by putting a registration number on them. This in turn requires some sort of central registry of ownership. There's an additional problem with planes, because it's difficult to identify an airborne machine. Planes also have a radio call-sign or a temporary radio squawk identifier. But rather than discuss how current processes should be extended to robots, the writer asks how to make the problem into a human being problem.

    2. Re:Of all the stupid shit... by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Dude just enjoy the buttered popcorn and watch the stupid parade, it beats tracking down law professor Anupam Chander and smacking his head with the nearest engineering book until we're forced to flee by the incoming police sirens by a long shot as far as effort goes.

    3. Re:Of all the stupid shit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm kinda wondering how or if this guy actually has a license to practice law.

    4. Re:Of all the stupid shit... by mujadaddy · · Score: 1, Redundant

      It's a click-bait article

      What the fuck is an "article"?

      --
      Populus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur...
      "Force shits upon Reason's back." - Poor Richard's Almanac
    5. Re:Of all the stupid shit... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      He's a professor of law, so maybe not.

    6. Re:Of all the stupid shit... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Yes, the whole question is fundamentally stupid. Or else utterly ignorant. Robots are not people, they're just technology. They don't need a passport anymore than my toaster needs a passport!

      We already have many robots crossing country borders all the time - Roombas, industrial robotic equipment, little toy puppies purchased for the kids, and so forth. If we get self driving cars then those will of course also be robots. The Zoltar fortune teller booth is also a robot.

      Ah, but these stupid/ignorant people will now say "but those aren't robots!" But of course they are. People are maybe confused with "androids"? But even there the only special thing between an android and a human is the shape and amount of illusion involved. Androids are not people either, they don't need a passport anymore than Teddy Ruxpin needs a passport. Oh, but wait, maybe these stupid/ignorant people think that robots mean artificial intelligence. And not just any AI that we've had since the 70s, but the sort of AI you find in science fiction. In that case, they may have a point, and when we are within a century of having such technology then maybe it will be time to start considering this. In the meantime people should get better at understanding the terminology, the technology, and the legal issues.

    7. Re:Of all the stupid shit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's a professor of law, so maybe not.

      Barack Obama was a law professor yet he has no trouble trampling on the Constitution of the United States of America while in the Oval Office. That boy needs a whipping but his masters are in collusion with this traitor.

    8. Re:Of all the stupid shit... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck is an "article"?

      It's the thing the Slashdot crowd doesn't read.

    9. Re:Of all the stupid shit... by kheldan · · Score: 1

      You're right, it IS stupid. Robots are property, plain and simple, therefore like any other property, at best the owner of that property would have to have permission from the country in question to have his property operating within it. Otherwise that property could (and probably should) be seized, probably under salvage laws, perhaps as an illegal and unauthorized surveillance device, maybe even as a terrorist weapon.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
  16. The fuck......? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is beyond retarded to ask. Of course not

    1. Re:The fuck......? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      A similarly stupid question might be, "if I get a head transplant will I need two passports?"

    2. Re:The fuck......? by LeadSongDog · · Score: 1

      "if I get a head transplant will I need two passports?"

      No, but the head's passport might need new biometrics.

      --
      Oh, I'm sorry sir, I thought you were referring to me, Mr. Wensleydale.
  17. They have VINs. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    K.

  18. Robotic rights before clone rights? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A robot is something that can be manufactured and duplicated in it's entirety, so how does a passport apply to a non-unique individual?

    I never thought I'd see robots seeing this problem before human clones.

  19. The next question . . . by phrackthat · · Score: 1

    Were they manufactured here or did they cross the border illegally? We can't have all of that cheap illegal robotic labor driving down wages for robot citizens manufactured here!

  20. No. by Kjella · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We recently had a media case about an ex-couple suing each other over custody of the dog. In short, despite whatever personal relationship they had to the dog it was not like a child custody case, it was decided by property law. A robot is someone's property, it's no different from flying an RC plane across the border. Unless you got sentient robots granted their own rights, it's a non-issue. And if you do got sentient robots then passport control is the least of your worries.

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    1. Re:No. by m.alessandrini · · Score: 1

      Unless you got sentient robots granted their own rights...

      That would be the only logical sense of the question. If in a distant future robots will think and sense equal or more than men, it could be the case that they will have to be considered individuals with full civil rights. But while arriving there we will need to sort out many other bigger issues first.

    2. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In short, despite whatever personal relationship they had to the dog it was not like a child custody case, it was decided by property law.

      That seems like a flaw in the law to me, unless you're oversimplifying it. In cases like that the courts should be take into account the emotional and physical well-being of the animal, although if both parties will provide good care of the animal and it will be happy being looked after by either of them, then falling back to property law may then be reasonable. Of course, I'm just saying what I think the law should be, the courts have to rule on the law as it is written.

  21. Stop already, AI is AI robots are not AI by MrL0G1C · · Score: 4, Interesting

    There is no AI that has common sense, it's a fantasy.

    And most of all:

    Robot != AI

    A robot is a machine that sits in a factory making cars.

    AI is mostly software which sits in a computer typically in a university or corporate lab.

    Please quit with calling AI robots.

    --
    Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    1. Re:Stop already, AI is AI robots are not AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A robot is a machine that sits in a factory making cars.

      Shit man. You should have posted that as an AC. They're coming after you first!

    2. Re:Stop already, AI is AI robots are not AI by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      According to PBS, there are some robots that do move and may cross borders:
      http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/spiesfly/

    3. Re:Stop already, AI is AI robots are not AI by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      And?

      If I stick a tower pc in the back of a truck and drive across the border, should the pc have a passport? No, of course not, so why should a robot have a passport?

      Robots are not intelligent.

      Robot definition:
      'A machine capable of carrying out a complex series of actions automatically, especially one programmable by a computer.'

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
  22. No, but should have insurance! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Insurance for lost - by board guards looking for "contraband". Like they do with laptop, tablets, phones, memory sticks.

    Do not forget since they are valuable, you may have to post a bond to guarantee the removal of the robot at end of stay.

    Travel to Korea with a computer (Z-80 Lug-able), they wanted to me pay $3k tariff to bring it in, since I would be leaving it. I offered for them give me claim cheque, since I was leaving via that same terminal in 3 days and hold it for me. Back to tariff, this time $2k. Offered to claim check. $1k. Claim cheque. Then they stamped my passport 3 times, plus a special stamp that had the serial number of computer on it. when on the gig. When back to air port to leave. Total ticket agent about special stamp, she was confused. Had to walk with me down to passport/baggage check. They went "What?" Checked, double checked, call supervisor, then stamped, stamped, stamped. Waited there in limbo (half though customs, no return, while the ticket agent walked back to her computer, checked me in, walked my boarding pass back... then on my way. PS: Had business letter and international invoice with US Customs stamps and sigs (that is another long story to get. Lets say walking the wrong way into customs Arrival Area).

  23. Robots can travel via the Internet by Arnold+Reinhold · · Score: 1

    The software and internal state of robot A can be passed to robot B in an encrypted file over the Internet, carrying the robot's "Identity" with it. So border controls like a passport are meaningless.

  24. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Robots "shouldn't" need passports.

    But then, nor should people. Passports are not a thing that would exist in an ideal world.

    In the world we've got, though? Probably not such a bad idea.

  25. What about unicorns and fairies? by MrL0G1C · · Score: 5, Funny

    Shouldn't we be making sure that unicorns, fairies and dragons get passports - after all, they were first.

    Why are robots jumping the queue?

    --
    Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
    1. Re:What about unicorns and fairies? by LongearedBat · · Score: 1

      On a more serious note, should we not have this discussion about all greater apes first?

    2. Re:What about unicorns and fairies? by MrL0G1C · · Score: 1

      I guess, and what about dolphins and fish crossing borders, how are we going to stop that or issue passports to fish?

      --
      Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
  26. No, their owners need passports. That is it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Robot owners bring robots just like pet owners bring pets. Does that need more discussion?

  27. whee by dissy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Well of course robots need passports, silly!
    Just like my car needs its own passport to cross a border.

    In addition my lawnmower has its own drivers license, my garage door opener has a concealed carry permit, and my 50" big screen TV takes a taxicab to a shrink once a week because of a broken heart from when my ps4 left it for a 60" :P

    1. Re:whee by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      a passport for a car is a real concept when crossing some borders.

      it's more like a permit system though. I don't think the article writer was thinking along those lines because that would be boring, singularity hipsters like much more to ask questions asked in scifi in the late 1940's.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  28. Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by tmosley · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There was a time when people didn't need passports to travel between nations. They were only introduced in the 1840's and only became popular after the American Civil War. Prior to that, human beings had the right to move between nations as they desired, with only the most autocratic (ie feudal, czarist Russia) demanding that their people remain tied to the land where they were born. And indeed, most people travelled between nations without need for one until WWI, when the need for "security" overwhelmed the difficulty of enforcement between nations that were at war, or were in danger of soon going to war.

    But, of course, the world is no longer at war, is it?

    The question shouldn't be "why should robots have passports?" it is "why should humans?"

    1. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by viperidaenz · · Score: 1

      The world has always been at war and always will be

      If you believe otherwise, you're deluded.

    2. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by mjwx · · Score: 1

      They were only introduced in the 1840's and only became popular after the American Civil War. Prior to that, human beings had the right to move between nations as they desired,

      Prior to the 1840's people didn't regularly cross borders and governments didn't provide services.

      Passports were invented as a necessity to international travel opening up to the middle and lower classes.

      I wouldn't want to give up my Australian Passport as it grants me a lot of rights, even in foreign countries.

      The question shouldn't be "why should robots have passports?" it is "why should humans?"

      Because you cant imagine the chaos of hundreds of thousands of undocumented border crossings.

      I guarantee every solution you have to that is either going to be stupid, useless or a passport like system (or possibly all three at once).

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    3. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by westlake · · Score: 1

      There was a time when people didn't need passports to travel between nations. They were only introduced in the 1840's and only became popular after the American Civil War.

      International travel before the invention of the railroad and the steamboat was not something to be contemplated lightly. It was an expensive, time-consuming and dangerous business.

      Legal requirements are not the same thing as practical necessities.

      Even when passports were not usually required, Americans requested U.S. passports. Records of the Department of State show that 130,360 passports were issued between 1810 and 1873, and that 369,844 passports were issued between 1877 and 1909. Some of those passports were family passports or group passports. A passport application could cover, variously, a wife, a child, or children, one or more servants, or a woman traveling under the protection of a man. The passport would be issued to the man. Similarly, a passport application could cover a child traveling with his or her mother. The passport would be issued to the mother. The number of Americans who traveled without passports is unknown.

      United States passport

    4. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wooooosh

    5. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rights are not granted.

    6. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I remember not needing a passport to fly or drive into the US from Canada. It's difficult to justify protecting the border against Canadians, but somehow the requirement still holds.

      Nevertheless, I think there are import duties or some kind of taxes for commercial or industrial machinery, so it's kind of a passport system for machines.

    7. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There was a time when people didn't need passports to travel between nations. They were only introduced in the 1840's and only became popular after the American Civil War. Prior to that, human beings had the right to move between nations as they desired, with only the most autocratic (ie feudal, czarist Russia) demanding that their people remain tied to the land where they were born.

      Once again, a libertarian is pining for the past that never existed. In Europe some form of travel documentation has been necessary for most people since the Middle Ages. The passportless time came in late 19th century when the number of travelers increased so much that the old system broke down because it couldn't scale fast enough and it wasn't until the World War I when there was enough motivation for the states to create a replacement.

    8. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by rastos1 · · Score: 1

      There was a time when people didn't need passports to travel between nations.

      And there was a time when Villeins were tied to the land and could not move away without their lord's consent and the acceptance of the lord to whose manor they proposed to migrate to.

    9. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by tmosley · · Score: 3, Informative

      "Prior to the 1840's people didn't regularly cross borders"

      Yes they did. Much of Europe was composed entirely of borders. Remember Italy was a mess of states until the 1870's, same as Germany.

      "Passports were invented as a necessity to international travel opening up to the middle and lower classes."

      But that's wrong. How could requiring a document (that the individual had to PAY FOR) to enter a country POSSIBLY be cheaper than crossing without it? That doesn't even make sense. Keep in mind that borders were completely porous, and only soldiers were blocked from crossing prior to this time.

      "Because you cant imagine the chaos of hundreds of thousands of undocumented border crossings."

      You're right, that's why the EU and US have descended into chaos. It's total anarchy, I tellz ya!

      "I guarantee every solution you have to that is either going to be stupid, useless or a passport like system (or possibly all three at once)."

      Well, considering that felons can get passports from the US, and God knows where else, a more modern solution would be to simply run criminal background checks on people applying for visas (ie those staying for an extended period). Much better to have a private system (which would necessarily transcend borders and *GASP* treat everyone fairly rather than giving Westerners a golden ticket while completely fucking over the huddled masses yearning to be free). No more of these "stateless" people getting stuck in airport terminals or refugee camps. Treat people like fucking people. What a concept.

    10. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by tmosley · · Score: 1

      Because there were times when people were less free, we can't ever argue that we should have freedoms that we once held in the past, like the UN-recognized human right to freedom of movement. Note that article 13 mentions nothing about passports, and the concept of a passport that you have to pay money for is, in fact, in direct violation of the same article, as it is a restriction on movement.

    11. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by tmosley · · Score: 1

      Says the cited conditions never existed in the past.

      References a time in the past where the cited conditions existed.

      Statists, everyone! Give them a hand! They sure need it! And they're gonna take it from you even if you don't want to, by force!

    12. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by tmosley · · Score: 1

      But it was. Much of Europe was composed of states the size of Vatican City. You could walk across three of them in a day without trying too hard.

      Also, note that having a passport to aid in travel is very much different from being REQUIRED to have a passport to cross a border. It's like being required to have a business license and a business bank account to have a garage sale. Sure, if you were having them every day, or scaling it up into a "real" business, those things might be a good idea, but requiring EVERYONE to have them is ridiculous.

    13. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Before WW1 the only people travelling between countries much were the very well off, who in effect formed their own separate country anyway. A rich upper class French student visiting Greece had much more in common with a rich upper class German student visiting Greece than a poor French peasant.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    14. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      the UN-recognized human right to freedom of movement [wikipedia.org]. Note that article 13 mentions nothing about passports, and the concept of a passport that you have to pay money for is, in fact, in direct violation of the same article, as it is a restriction on movement.

      Well in that case oil companies charging for gas, or airlines charging air fares are restricting your movement.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    15. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by tmosley · · Score: 1

      You are thinking in a very American centric way. For the third time this thread, much of Europe was composed of states the size of Vatican City. You could walk across three of them in a day. Think about the trade situation in an area like that.

    16. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by tmosley · · Score: 1

      No. You need to understand the difference between negative and positive rights. You have a right to travel. You don't have a right to someone else's vehicle. You should most certainly be able to walk across a border without needing a slip of paper from your government.

    17. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you cant imagine the chaos of hundreds of thousands of undocumented border crossings.

      Au contraire; I live in the USA; I can most certainly imagine the reality of this.

    18. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is there no moderation for "Factually incorrect"?

    19. Re:Humans SHOULDN'T need passports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They were only introduced in the 1840's

      That would be soon after the modern concept of "police" was formed. It might have been a part of the counter revolutionary reaction from nations and monarchs fearing for another revolution.

  29. For Robby's Sake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    You are telling us that we should attach some identity documentation in addition to the export and import declarations to satisfy some export control regulation? Or is robot piracy rate really that high? Hmm, robot pirates..awesome!

  30. does my power drill need one? by deadweight · · Score: 1

    Things that do not need passports: drills saws computers scewdrivers Things that do: people

  31. What robots need by PopeRatzo · · Score: 2

    I bought my Roomba it's own cat. Though now that I think about it, I haven't seen the cat since last weekend.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  32. Already Exists by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Documentation is required when importing or exporting goods.
    How is this any different?

  33. Getting a little ahead of ourselves here... by pigiron · · Score: 1

    aren't we?

  34. Good idea. by grub · · Score: 1


    I'm going to beat the rush and bring my Roomba to the passport office tomorrow morning.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  35. Robots are Distributed Systems by virtigex · · Score: 1

    Unless you build a robot with no connectivity at all, robots are distributed systems. For example, If your robot runs Robot Operating System (ROS www.ros.org), then it's distributed. Everything is held together by ROS_MASTER, which is a TCP port somewhere. If you create a VPN on the internet your robot could be composed of two identical machines either side of a border. Perhaps having an import license, such as you would have with cars, weapons and other potentially lethal items, would be the correct thing to require.

  36. Do robots need passports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is not the stupidest question I have ever heard, but it's close.

    1. Re:Do robots need passports? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      This is not the stupidest question I have ever heard, but it's close.

      YMBNH

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  37. Existing Precedent - Vehicles by Rich0 · · Score: 1

    We already have processes for handling things like vehicles (especially aircraft) crossing borders. Unless the vehicle is crossing for an indefinite period of time there is little to no paperwork. It isn't like airlines pay duties on the value of an A340 every time it lands.

    For things like repairs/etc you might pay duties on the parts once, when entering the country where the aircraft is based.

    I don't see how robots would be any different, until we get to the point where they're sentient. At that point, the robots will be the ones making the rules anyway, so you'll have to ask them.

  38. Drones by manu0601 · · Score: 1

    Bin Laden could tell us US drones do not ask for permission to cross borders.

  39. Betteridge's law ftw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never seen a better example.

  40. it's the stupid AI thing by gl4ss · · Score: 1

    it's just some wanabe futorologist running ahead of things.

    better ask does your gun need a passport? no. it needs a permit or permits.

    once the ai can by itself spontaneously try for argue for getting a permit to go to another country then you can start arguing about robot rights... going ahead of things like this is just fucked up.

    next up, do angels need passports?

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    1. Re:it's the stupid AI thing by Beck_Neard · · Score: 1

      exactly.

      --
      A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
  41. are you for real by TheRecklessWanderer · · Score: 1

    I hope no one is paying this guy money to do his "research". What a phenomenal waste of time. Lets give birds passports too, and the wind. The wind definitely needs a passport.

    --
    Mean what you say...say what you mean.
  42. What about 3D printers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After all, they're the game-changiest of the post-scarcity digital manufacturing game-changers.

    1. Re:What about 3D printers? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I think 3D printers are like touches from the hand of God. A least going by the comments on slashdot.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  43. bills of lading by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    They're cargo. They need a passport the same way a box electronic components needs a passport.

    aka... no. A bill of lading is sufficient.

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  44. TADA! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Slashdot, why report news when you can ask silly questions?

  45. Licence Plate by bickerdyke · · Score: 1

    What they're talking about is simply called a licence plate

    --
    bickerdyke
  46. pets do! by jamshidsangi · · Score: 1

    pets do need a passport, so eventually robots will as well

  47. Can robots have citizenship? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No point in having passports if you don't have a place you "belong".

  48. No by zmooc · · Score: 1

    The most logical answer to this question is another question:

    Do humans need passports?

    --
    0x or or snor perron?!
  49. Waste of money by louic · · Score: 1

    The government (regardless of which one) never misses a good opportunity to waste money. This needs to be investigated in-depth by a large committee of overpaid political and legislative experts who know nothing about robots.

  50. ye dinnae put salt on your porridge, the noo? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    Such passports are "travel documents" and marked to show that they are limited, thus not full passports.

    It's lucky Scotland didn't vote for independence.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:ye dinnae put salt on your porridge, the noo? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      OK, though that wouldn't have changed the discussion. UK passports would be instantly invalid for Scots, as per the fear-mongering from the English. So it wouldn't have invalidated my statement.

      Name one place that you can have a full passport without stated restriction in/on it, for a non-citizen. As far as I know, there is none, and reality proves you wrong. Sure, you can think up what-ifs that can't be proven wrong. Dinosaurs had pangaea passports, and were residents, but not citizens.

  51. Apes already are persons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    according to some judges, despite not being able to fend for themselves in our modern society which requires things like filling out tax forms.

  52. Corporations by Livius · · Score: 1

    It would be easier for the corporations and governments they own to just take citizenship away from those pesky humans, and level the human and robot playing field that way.

  53. Passports are for puny week annoying humans by DickBreath · · Score: 1

    Why should a robot need a passport? It is a machine. Like your toaster. This will continue to be true for some time to come.

    Should other dangerous machines also need a passport? What about a robot welding machine? A numerically controlled drill press? (Hey, it could decide to hurt you just when you happen to have your hand in the wrong spot!)

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  54. Why do people need passports? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The bigger question to me is why anybody needs a passport to cross imaginary lines that politicians have drawn on maps. The only thing that ought to matter about whether you set foot on a piece of property is whether the owner of the property allows you there. The idea of "national sovereignty" is a remnant of the past that needs to die.

  55. No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, no they do not.

    That was easy. Next Question.

  56. humans don't even need passports by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why are we going out of our way to make our lives more complicated?

  57. The Bot can get it's own passport by cant_get_a_good_nick · · Score: 1

    what if a software bot could buy drugs AND a passport?

    To those that joke about this, imagine you have a bot car that hits someone? or is programmed to cause harm? a robotic car can drive to canada and back, who is responsible for contents?

  58. Passport. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They need a passport if they can ask for it?