正文翻譯

毫無疑問，機器人正變得越來越復(fù)雜，機器人正在成為我們?nèi)粘Ｉ钪胁豢苫蛉钡囊徊糠帧?但是隨著我們與機器人的互動和依賴增加，有一個重要的問題：如果機器人真的違法犯罪，甚至傷害了某人——無論是故意的還是無意的，會發(fā)生什么后果？

Robots are unquestioningly getting more sophisticated by the year, and as a result, are becoming an indelible part of our daily lives. But as we start to increase our interactions and dependance on robots, an important question needs to be asked: What would happen if a robot actually committed a crime, or even hurt someone — either deliberately or by mistake?

雖然我們對此的第一反應(yīng)可能是責怪機器人，但追究責任的問題比單純責怪機器人要復(fù)雜得多，也更微妙。 與任何涉及涉嫌犯罪行為的事件一樣，我們需要考慮一系列因素。 讓我們更深入地探討一下，當您的機器人違法時，誰應(yīng)該負責。

While our first inclination might be to blame the robot, the matter of apportioning blame is considerably more complicated and nuanced than that. Like any incident involving an alleged criminal act, we need to consider an entire host of factors. Let's take a deeper look and find out who should pay when your robot breaks the law.

為了更好地理解這個問題，我采訪了機器人倫理專家Patrick Lin，他是加州理工州立大學倫理 + 新興科學小組的負責人。 通過與他的交談，我了解到這個問題有多么重要。 正如Lin告訴我的那樣，“任何一方都可能對如今機器人的不當行為負責。”

To better understand this issue I spoke to robot ethics expert Patrick Lin, the Director of Ethics + Emerging Sciences Group at California Polytechnic State University. It was through my conversation with him that I learned just how pertinent this issue is becoming. As Lin told me, "Any number of parties could be held responsible for robot misbehaviour today."

機器人倫理和機器倫理

Robot and machine ethics

在我們深入探討之前，需要區(qū)分兩個不同的研究領(lǐng)域：機器人倫理學（robot ethics）和機器倫理學（machine ethics）。

Before we get too far along in the discussion, a distinction needs to be made between two different fields of study: robot ethics and machine ethics.

我們目前處于機器人倫理時代，關(guān)注的焦點在于如何以及為何設(shè)計、構(gòu)造和使用機器人，比如Roomba等家用機器人、自動駕駛汽車以及可能的在戰(zhàn)場上自動殺人的機器人。 這些機器人雖然能夠在沒有人類監(jiān)督的情況下“行動”，但本質(zhì)上是無意識的自動機。 因此，機器人倫理主要關(guān)注其使用的適當性。

We are currently in the age of robot ethics, where the concern lies with how and why robots are designed, constructed, and used. This includes such things as domestic robots like Roomba, self-driving cars, and the potential for autonomous killing machines on the battlefield. These robots, while capable of "acting" without human oversight, are essentially mindless automatons. Robot ethics, therefore, is primarily concerned with the appropriateness of their use.

另一方面，機器倫理學更具推測性，因為它考慮了機器人（或更準確地說，機器人的具體化人工智能編程）具有自我意識和道德思考能力的未來潛力。 因此，機器倫理關(guān)注的是先進機器人的實際行為和具體行動。

Machine ethics, on the other hand, is a bit more speculative in that it considers the future potential for robots (or more accurately, their embodied artificially intelligent programming) to have self-awareness and the capacity for moral thought. Consequently, machine ethics is concerned with the actual behavior and actions of advanced robots.

因此，在將任何責任歸咎于機器人的邪惡行為之前，我們需要確定這兩個類別中的哪一個真正適用于面對的問題。 現(xiàn)在和不久的將來，機器人道德肯定夠用了，在這種情況下，責任應(yīng)該歸于制造商、所有者，在某些情況下甚至是受害者。

So, before any blame can get assigned to a robot for any nefarious action, we would need to decide which of these two categories apply. For now and the immediate future, robot ethics most certainly qualifies, in which case accountability should to be attributed to either the manufacturer, the owner, and in some cases even the victim.

但展望未來，隨著機器人在道德成熟度方面越來越接近人類，機器人很可能必須為自己的罪行負責

But looking further into the future to a time when robots match our own level of moral sophistication, the day is coming when they will very likely to have to answer for their crimes.

制造商的責任

Manufacturer liability

在現(xiàn)在和可預(yù)見的未來，機器人犯錯的責任通常落在制造商身上。Lin說: “當涉及到更基本的自主機器和系統(tǒng)時，制造商應(yīng)確認預(yù)見到的任何軟件或硬件缺陷。”
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.ltaaa.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處

For now and the foreseeable future, culpability for a robot that has gone wrong will usually fall on the manufacturer. "When it comes to more basic autonomous machines and systems," said Lin, "a manufacturer needs to ensure that any software or hardware defect should have been foreseen."

他舉了一個關(guān)于Roomba的假設(shè)例子，假如它身臨混亂之中——制造商無法預(yù)料的一系列變量。 “人們可以想象 Roomba從邊緣掉落并正好砸在一只貓上，”他說，“在這種情況下，可以說制造商負有責任。”

He cited the hypothetical example of a Roomba that experiences a perfect storm of confusion — a set of variables that the manufacturer could not have anticipated. "One could imagine the Roomba falling off an edge and landing right on top of a cat," he said, "in which case it could be said that the manufacturer is responsible."

事實上，因為機器人只是根據(jù)其編程運行，所以它們不能為自己的行為負責，也絕對沒有惡意。 如果消費者按照說明書使用機器人并且沒有以任何方式進行修改，那么消費者也不應(yīng)該承擔責任。

Indeed, because the robot is just operating according to the limits of its programming, it cannot be held accountable for its actions. There was absolutely no malice involved. And assuming that the robot was being used according to instructions and not modified in any way, the consumer shouldn't be held liable either.

超出預(yù)期用途的使用

Outside intended use

Lin指出，這引起了另一個問題。他說："機器人擁有者也有可能誤用并直接駭入自己的機器人。Lin舉例說，家庭防衛(wèi)機器人在亞洲正被越來越多地應(yīng)用--包括進行家庭巡邏的機器人，可以發(fā)射胡椒噴霧和使用彩彈槍。他告訴我："可以想象，有人可能想把Roomba武器化，"他說，"在這種情況下，所有者將承擔責任，而不是制造商。" 因為機器人以完全超出其預(yù)期用途的方式行動，所以制造商免責。

Which, as Lin pointed out, raises another issue.
"It's also possible that owners will misuse their robots and hack directly into them," he said. Lin pointed to the example of home defense robots that are being increasingly used in Asia — including robots that go on home patrol and can shoot pepper spray and paint-ball guns. "It's conceivable that someone might want to weaponize the Roomba," he told me, "in which case the owner would be on the hook and not the manufacturer." In such a scenario, the robot would act in a way completely outside of its intended use, thus absolving the manufacturer from liability.

但是，Lin也澄清說，事情依然不簡單。"他說："僅僅因為擁有者修改了機器人，使其做了制造商從未設(shè)想過或無法預(yù)見的事情，并不意味著制造商就完全脫責了。有些人可能會說，制造商應(yīng)該預(yù)見到黑客攻擊的可能性，或其他類似的修改，并建立保障措施，防止這種操縱。"

But as Lin clarified for us, it's still not as cut-and-dry as that. "Just because the owner modified the robot to do things that the manufacturer never intended or could never foresee doesn't mean they're completely off the hook," he said. "Some might argue that the manufacturer should have foreseen the possibility of hacking, or other such modifications, and in turn build in safeguards to prevent this kind of manipulation."

受害者的責任

Blame the victim

某些情況下甚至受害者也會被追究責任。"想想自動駕駛汽車，"Lin說，"一個亂穿馬路的人可能會突然跑過馬路并被撞。在這種情況下，真正應(yīng)該負責的是受害者。

And there are still yet other scenarios in which even the victim could be held responsible. "Consider self-driving cars," said Lin, "and the possibility that a jay-walker could suddenly run across the street and get hit." In such a case it's the victim that's really to blame.

事實上，人們可以設(shè)想很多場景，在這些場景中，人們由于不注意或魯莽，不小心被他們周圍越來越多的強大且自主的機器所傷。