# Autonomous robot people could be constructed right now **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [March 6, 2024, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540 "2024-03-06T14:01:32Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2024, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/181 "2024-03-14T10:38:35Z")
Agreed - the integration (and tuning of that integration) might be the most difficult piece. From my armchair it seems like just plugging a bunch of things together, but the devil is in the details. The coffee cup is weird. given the apparent dexterity of the machine, there doesn’t seem to be any obvious reason why it couldn’t handle a cup of liquid - it has the capacity to grip it; it has the finesse of operation not to slosh it around; it’s possible they tried to get it to do that and didn’t yet succeed, but had some sort of obligation to publish a demo at a specific milestone date and time; it’s possible they hyperfocused on the handling of the coffee pod and didn’t think of the cup part, or didn’t think it was interesting, or something like that. Absence of an element in a demonstration might mean incapability, but it probably doesn’t always, automatically mean that. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2024, 10:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/182 "2024-03-14T10:45:00Z")
> [@Stanislaus](#): > > But it’s one thing to create a task saying “scoop hedgehog from pond” and another to have an accessible trained behaviour in scooping hedgehogs from ponds. > > Does it need to be specific training? I’ve never been trained in scooping hedgehogs from ponds myself, but I have done some pond-scooping in my time and I’m confident I can rise to the challenge if needed. I am less confident that a robot trained to scoop weeds from a pond could apply that safely to a hedgehog - simply because the training videos I see are so highly specified. This is where I think a multi-layered approach might help. A model that can make a high-level decision that a hedgehog needs rescuing from a pond, might not be all that good at co-ordinating the actions of doing the thing, but it doesn’t have to be the same model doing all of the functions; it could be (much as it is with humans) different, specialised subsystem-models handling the stuff they are good at; an additional model that is very good at handling objects, but not so great at understanding why it’s been told to do that, might provide the physical skill to augment the capability of the decision-making part. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2024, 2:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/183 "2024-03-14T14:51:40Z")
> [@Sam\_Stone](#): > > Why do you keep misrepresenting things? The robot was told, “Clean up this mess”. Not, “Pick up the three bits of trash of known types and put the trash in the bins.” I mean that absolulely was what was demonstrated, its not misrepresenting it at all. The robot was presented with a very carefully selected set of bits of trash and bins in a very clean, largely empty, room. Then given a single phrase that caused it to put the trash in the bins. That is lightyears away from anything remotely like “autonomy”. Not that the LLM side is not impressive (assuming it _actually_ used a LLM to decode that sentence into instructions, I’ve been around to startups enough to see that that could 100% be faked in that demo). Not too long ago that would have been thought the difficult part of that problem, and the “physical intelligence” of actually seeing and manipulating the environment the (relatively) easy part. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/184 "2024-03-17T10:08:38Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > So, “autonomous” is somewhat akin to “independent”? The thing infants lack that renders them not autonomous? Yes, I believe the two words are synonyms when describing a person. But when we speak of an independent or autonomous person, that can mean a number of things: - a person with a relatively independent nature or character - a person who does not take a side in a particular conflict - a person who does not depend too much on any particular person (or people) to function in society I had the latter sense of _autonomous_ in mind, or something very near to it. I believe when @Mangetout wrote ‘not a slave’, he had the same idea. If you go back to the 5 criteria in the OP, they are not enough to rule out a slave. The infant that would starve to death without a parent is not autonomous. Yet a famine does not strip a person of autonomy - the function of a person in society is sensitive to societal factors such as famine. The hypothetical machine that stares at grass until its battery goes critical, which necessitates otherwise avoidable trespass and energy theft, does not meet my criteria for an autonomous person. In the same way, I do not consider autonomous a human person who stares at grass until he becomes so hungry he must resort to trespass and theft of food. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 10:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/185 "2024-03-17T10:22:10Z")
I was sort of with you until the last paragraph. A human who **chooses** to stare at grass whilst starving to death is (I would say) autonomous. A person who stares at grass whilst starving, because they are unable to stop, is not. The difficulty in mapping that definition to a robot will of course be the question of what ‘choice’ really means, but I think that may be a red herring given that the concept of true free will in humans is argued by philosophers and scientists. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/186 "2024-03-17T10:25:01Z")
I consider the ability to make a choice part of personhood, not autonomy. Infants make choices, for example. Functioning in society without being overly dependent is the key to autonomy, IMHO. Staring at grass until you starve - without an extraordinary rationale (hunger strike?) - just doesn’t cut it. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 10:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/187 "2024-03-17T10:29:41Z")
Hmm. I don’t really like the idea that one should be beholden to others to decide if ones rationale is good enough. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 10:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/188 "2024-03-17T10:33:45Z")
Well, it’s not so much about judging rationality as it is about whether this particular self-destructive behavior is considered “functioning in society”. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/189 "2024-03-17T10:38:39Z")
I’m not even sure I agree that functioning in society is critical to autonomy. If someone decides to go and live the life of an off grid hermit in the mountains, is that person behaving autonomously? ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 10:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/190 "2024-03-17T10:49:08Z")
That’s a good point. Is he able to meet his basic needs? Or is he starving himself to death staring at grass or chasing hedgehogs? I’m tempted to say he doesn’t get to change the standard just by moving some distance from other people. I think if he isn’t self sufficient, he hasn’t left society. And if he is self sufficient, he is undoubtably autonomous. A society of one, so to speak. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 10:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/191 "2024-03-17T10:56:18Z")
Also where is failure in this? If he is able to meet his own needs for three years then one day he trips and breaks his ankle and he chooses to set it himself, but eventually dies of wound complications, did he stop being autonomous? Autonomy is self-determination. I don’t find anything in the definition that speaks about effectiveness or success. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 11:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/192 "2024-03-17T11:20:40Z")
Autonomy is self _governance_, if I am not mistaken. I think one can fail at government in more ways than one can fail at determination; determination either is or is not, while governance can be good, bad, effective, ineffective, successful, or unsuccessful. There is no question that a dead person cannot be an autonomous person. A dead person isn’t a person, strictly speaking he was a person. If our hermit was self sufficient, then ceased to be, unintentionally, that is the moment he ceased to be autonomous. Whether that moment occurred when he was injured, or at some point during the complications, or at the moment of death, would depend on the standard of medical care he considered sufficient. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/193 "2024-03-17T12:41:45Z")
I feel like if I had simply used the term ‘self-governing’ in place of ‘autonomous’, this part of the discussion might never have happened, even though those two things mean the same. I think you might be inadvertently including ‘and completely successful at it’ as a hidden criterion in the notion of autonomy. I don’t think it is necessary and I didn’t anticipate any sort of infallibility in the scenario. ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/194 "2024-03-17T13:01:42Z")
Or it’s possible that I just don’t understand the thrust of your objection ---
**Author:** ![Tibby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tibby/32/17030_2.png) [@Tibby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tibby)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/195 "2024-03-17T14:18:34Z")
We must approach the creation of self-aware slave robots with caution, ensuring that penalties for building or owning such entities are comparable to the serious offense of enslaving humans. However, a _non-sentient_ robot should not be classified as a slave any more than any other inanimate tool. The real challenge lies in recognizing the emergence of consciousness within AI and preventing the development of sentient ‘slave robots.’ Regarding safety, strict standards must be implemented. For instance, domestic robots could be restricted to a height of no more than 3 feet, with break-away limbs for emergency shut down. If one goes berserk, just kick him and he’ll fall to pieces. Additionally, programming should limit the proximity of these robots to prevent more than two from operating within 25 feet of each other, avoiding the risk of a collective malfunction. The last thing I need is for a pack of pissed off tiny robots chasing after me. While the concept of _self-aware_ (e.g. sapient) robots is fascinating, their production should be tightly controlled and regulated. Our planet already hosts an over-abundance of intelligent life forms, and the current biodiversity crisis (Holocene extinction) suggests we should be cautious about introducing more. Robots may indeed have a smaller ecological footprint, but our planet doesn’t need millions more technological beings doing damage. On the other hand, if we could _replace_ humans with self-conscious robots, maybe we’d be in better shape. As for which AI company should lead in building autonomous robots, Boston Dynamics stands out with their impressive track record in robotics innovation. I’m less clear on which AI company should lead the way. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/196 "2024-03-17T21:42:36Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > I feel like if I had simply used the term ‘self-governing’ in place of ‘autonomous’, this part of the discussion might never have happened, even though those two things mean the same. I think you might be inadvertently including ‘and completely successful at it’ as a hidden criterion in the notion of autonomy. I don’t think it is necessary and I didn’t anticipate any sort of infallibility in the scenario. […] Or it’s possible that I just don’t understand the thrust of your objection I don’t think an autonomous person has to be completely successful. You brought up an edge case - a person living in complete isolation - in which I admitted, if he cannot take care of himself and dies, he isn’t autonomous any more. Let me reframe my main argument. > [@Mangetout](#): > > - Senses to receive inputs from the outside world > - Perception - the ability to model the environment and understand the raw sense data > - A body physically capable of locomotion, object manipulation and proprioception > - Motor skills to be able to move the body in an organised fashion and drive the manipulators > - Intent, agency and volition - the ability to decide to do things > [@Mangetout](#): > > autonomous here specifically means: **not a slave or servant or robot monkey butler.** Imagine a human person with the following qualities: - has all 5 senses - normal perception - healthy body - normal motor skills - normal ability to decide to do things - is a slave/servant Per your 5 criteria this person is autonomous. Per your definition of autonomous, this person is not autonomous because he is a slave/servant. You have contradicted yourself. Now add my 6th criteria (which I’ll tweak a little, again): - not overly dependent on or under the control of any particular person(s) to function in society and the person no longer qualifies as autonomous, resolving the contradiction. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/197 "2024-03-17T22:20:22Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > Per your 5 criteria this person is autonomous. Per your definition of autonomous, this person is not autonomous because he is a slave/servant. You have contradicted yourself. Not exactly. I specified that the being would have intent, agency and volition - the ability to decide things. A slave may have the _capacity_ for those things, but **agency** is the condition of being able to use them. Honestly, I think I know what I meant; I think you know what I meant. I am not sure what purpose is served by this semantic hair-splitting. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/198 "2024-03-17T22:25:51Z")
> [@Mangetout](#): > > **agency** is the condition of being able to use them. > [@Mangetout](#): > > I think you know what I meant. I’m afraid I don’t. I already told you that I personally consider intent, agency, and volition (collectively, the ability to make decisions) to be criterion for _personhood_. From my perspective a slave has all three, by definition. We must have some deeper misunderstanding here, for instance, I wouldn’t distinguish between ability and capacity, and I’m reading “condition of being able to” as “ability to”. Rendering your paragraph into this nonsensical mess: > I specified that the being would have the ability to decide things. A slave may have the ability to decide things, but **agency** is the ability to decide things. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/199 "2024-03-17T22:29:33Z")
OK. I guess it’s your thread now. Good luck. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2024, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540/200 "2024-03-17T22:30:45Z")
Oh, don’t be that way! I’ll stop, since you aren’t interested in this line of inquiry. ~Max [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/autonomous-robot-people-could-be-constructed-right-now/998540.md?page=11)