- What had happened was that a group of people created a robot that would go onto the darknet and purchase random goods. Of course due to the nature of the darknet, it was bound to have purchased something that would be illegal. Eventually the robot bought 10 pills of ecstasy along with 11 other items. The police eventually arrested the robot but after some time it was returned to the owners, along with the items purchased except for the pills. The owners were also not in trouble.
- I think doing something illegal for the sake of experimentation is ethically okay but it of course depends on the experiment and the goals the people want out of this experiment. The robot ended up buying something illegal but was it ethically wrong too? I think not. Even though the owners did not tell the robot what to buy, they are still responsible in the sense that it is their creation and by nature, it will buy something illegal because of it being placed in the environment such as the darknet. I think this aspect should not be legal.
- I think arresting the robot made no sense. The robot is a creation of humans, it does not have it’s own mind or opinions or anything. I do not think we are close to producing moral agent robots that can be legally liable before a court. At this point, all robots actions should be held responsible by its creator.
- The analogy between dogs and robots is very fitting. Owners are responsible for the actions of their dogs because dogs (even though they are intelligent) are not in the same realm as us in terms of legality. The same is for the robot. Therefore as responsible owners of dogs or robots, they must know the capabilities of their dogs/robots so that they can best react to any negative doings. Such as if you know your dog is more dangerous than most, do what you can to avoid such dangerous acts. The same for robots, if you know the robot could potentially do something that is not wanted, try your best to prevent it.
- Software Developer. The developer is at full responsibility as they know what this code is capable of. They created a robot to randomly purchase goods. Then place the robot in an environment where the vast majority of the goods would be illegal. Of course the odds of purchasing such illegal goods is much higher in the darknet.
- The Hardware Developer. They hold responsibility as well as they knew the software and its functions as that is how they would be able to create hardware for it.
- The System Designer. Integrating two things together requires knowledge of the two. Even at a basic understanding of the code anyone would be able to think that the odds of purchasing illegal items was very likely. Therefore, the system designer is at fault because they could have stopped it but instead went along with the plan.
- The Seller. Someone selling products must know a thing or two about their own products. At a basic understanding of this product, anyone with even the smallest amount of education can understand that this robot if placed in the darknet would be purchasing illegal items at a certain point. So the seller should be responsible for selling such a product.
- The Client/Owner. This person would be held responsible as soon as they used it on the darknet. Just purchasing it would be reasonable as they could use it on a market that is covered with legal goods like “amazon.ca”. However, using it on the darknet while knowing full well the environment the darknet is like and the capabilities of the robot is caused for the owner to be at fault.
Virackdara Chhom CP373 Blog 