4: Assimov's writing has extensive exploration of the three laws being insufficient beyond hypotheticals to assuage the fear of robots in men or to answer any the moral and ethical dilemmas they present.

I feel like at least part of the point of it all was that while the three laws embodied good principals they're too rigid in practice to actually be the basis of any sort of programmed behavior.

One of his stories is about the second and third law contradicting each other and locking the robot in a loop.

Another explores the duality of lying to spare people their feelings/hurting them by not telling the truth.

Others explore the ways the laws could inevitably be turned against people themselves.

Because the point of the Three Laws isn't to provide an answer for people's fear of machines. It was mostly fodder to create interesting and dramatic moral dilemmas. I.E. The three laws are not a serious proposal for how we deal with this problem.

This is a SPECTACULARLY terrible take. Maybe not #3 but the rest is so bad. 😂

OP: you're talking about AI alignment and yes, currently there's no way to prevent AI from killing us all if we were to develop AGI. The AI community talks a lot about this at lesswrong.com. I recommend going there instead of listening to idiots here.

Here's a fun one

Favorite part:

>"The concrete example I usually use here is nanotech, because there's been pretty detailed analysis of what definitely look like physically attainable lower bounds on what should be possible with nanotech, and those lower bounds are sufficient to carry the point. My lower-bound model of "how a sufficiently powerful intelligence would kill everyone, if it didn't want to not do that" is that it gets access to the Internet, emails some DNA sequences to any of the many many online firms that will take a DNA sequence in the email and ship you back proteins, and bribes/persuades some human who has no idea they're dealing with an AGI to mix proteins in a beaker, which then form a first-stage nanofactory which can build the actual nanomachinery. (Back when I was first deploying this visualization, the wise-sounding critics said "Ah, but how do you know even a superintelligence could solve the protein folding problem, if it didn't already have planet-sized supercomputers?" but one hears less of this after the advent of AlphaFold 2, for some odd reason.) The nanomachinery builds diamondoid bacteria, that replicate with solar power and atmospheric CHON, maybe aggregate into some miniature rockets or jets so they can ride the jetstream to spread across the Earth's atmosphere, get into human bloodstreams and hide, strike on a timer. Losing a conflict with a high-powered cognitive system looks at least as deadly as "everybody on the face of the Earth suddenly falls over dead within the same second".