Nyholm2022ControlProblem-A

#multipleEntries

There are multiple notes about this text. See also: Nyholm2022ControlProblem-B

Sven Nyholm- "A new control problem? Humanoid robots, artifcial intelligence, and the value of control"

Bibliographic info

Nyholm, S. (2022). A new control problem? Humanoid robots, artificial intelligence, and the value of control. AI and Ethics, 1-11.
robot rights

Commentary

This text presents an interesting perspective on the control problem related to robots and AI. It highlights the ethical complexities of control, emphasizing that not all forms of control are inherently positive or desirable. The author questions the assumption that having maximum control over advanced technologies is always good, drawing attention to the ethical problems associated with controlling other individuals.

One thought-provoking aspect is the comparison between control over humans and control over humanoid robots. The author argues that as robots become more human-like, it becomes ethically problematic to exercise full control over them, mirroring the unethical desire to control other human beings. This raises questions about the moral implications of creating humanoid robots that can be completely controlled.

The text also introduces the concept of self-control as a virtuous form of control. It suggests that if control over AI systems can be viewed as a form of self-control, it might be seen as ethically good. This viewpoint adds a nuanced dimension to the discussion, exploring the potential virtues and ethics of control in the context of AI.

Regarding weaknesses, the text could benefit from providing more concrete examples or evidence to support the arguments presented. It relies heavily on philosophical reasoning and does not incorporate empirical data or specific case studies to bolster its claims. Additionally, while the text raises important questions about the ethics of control, it does not provide definitive answers or propose practical solutions to the "new control problem" it introduces.

Excerpts & Key Quotes

Value in its own right

"... I think that control is not something that is only ever valued as a means to the end of being safe. I think that we often also value control as either an end in itself or as a core element of things that have value as ends in themselves."

Comment:

The statement highlights an important perspective on control, challenging the notion that it is solely valued for the purpose of ensuring safety. It suggests that control can be intrinsically valuable and appreciated for its own sake, independent of its role in achieving safety. Furthermore, it implies that control can be a fundamental component of things that are considered valuable in their own right.

This viewpoint broadens our understanding of control, acknowledging its multifaceted nature and the diverse reasons why it may be valued. It invites us to consider other dimensions of control beyond its instrumental role in mitigating risks. By recognizing control as an end in itself or as a vital aspect of valuable pursuits, it encourages a deeper exploration of its significance and implications in various contexts.

A counter argument to the quote could be that control is primarily valued as a means to an end, particularly the end of safety or security. While it is true that control can have intrinsic value and be appreciated for its own sake in certain contexts, such as personal autonomy or self-control, these instances are often exceptions rather than the norm.

Control and AI systems in the real world

"The control we are able to have over the AI systems may also not be very robust. We might be able to control them in laboratory settings, i.e., in very controlled environments. But once the AI systems are operating in the “real world”, it might be much harder to retain control over them along all the different dimensions of control"

Comment:

The quote brings attention to an important concern regarding control over AI systems. It suggests that while we may have a certain level of control over AI in laboratory or controlled environments, maintaining control becomes more challenging once these systems operate in the real world.

This observation raises potential issues regarding the robustness of control mechanisms and their applicability outside of controlled settings. It implies that the complexity and unpredictability of real-world contexts pose significant challenges to maintaining control over AI systems across various dimensions.

The quote assumes that control must be absolute and all-encompassing. However, in real world applications, control can be dynamic and context-dependent. It may involve continuous monitoring, feedback mechanisms, and iterative adjustments to ensure control is maintained effectively.

Extensions of human agency and extended self-Control

"In conclusion, from the point of view of control and its value, the best AI systems that we can create seems to be ones that can be seen as extensions over our own agency, over which we can have control that can be viewed as a form of extended self-control."

Comment:

The quote presents an intriguing perspective on the value of control in AI systems. It suggests that the most desirable AI systems are those that can be viewed as extensions of our own agency, enabling us to exercise control that resembles an extended form of self-control.

This perspective suggests that AI systems should be designed to match and improve human values, allowing people to have control and independence over these systems. When we see AI as an extension of ourselves, the control we have over it becomes a reflection of our own self-control, which can lead to positive and ethical interactions. In essence, humans and AI can collaborate in such a way that AI supports and enhances our capabilities rather than overpowering us. This empowers us to achieve our goals and handle challenging tasks more effectively.