THE headline on the front page of The Herald yesterday certainly captured the imagination, in ways both good and bad.
"Robots 'to be home helps'," it declared, instantly bringing on very mixed emotions for this reader.
I'm no technophobe, was an avid reader of science fiction in my youth, and still dip into the genre from time to time. Robots one day freeing humans from drudgery and hazardous work seemed a natural part of the march of progress.
The father of robotics, or at least the man who coined the term and popularised the concept in popular fiction, was the biochemist and novelist Isaac Asimov, who came up with The Three Laws which he hoped would one day be implanted in the minds of humanoid machines with artificial intelligence.
A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.
Remember, this insight dates back to the thirties, although he formalised the rules in a short story in 1942. It informed not just his own fiction in the series that began with I, Robot but that of Philip K. Dick (Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? filmed as Bladerunner), Arthur C. Clarke and Stanley Kubrick (2001: A Space Odyssey), the Terminator series (about to be reprised by Arnold Schwarzenegger), and many others from Star Wars to Star Trek.
This has been much more often dystopian than utopian and a function of art and story telling rather than of technology, but some scientists have feared for the theories espoused by Hungarian mathematician John von Neumann and computer scientist and SciFi writer Vernor Vinge about "the singularity" - the point in time when the ability of artificial intelligence begins to outrun human capabilities. Or worse, imagination.
We have an excellent example on our screens at present with the Channel Four series Humans, about a near future where "synths" - perfect replicants - are serving humans in the home, in our health service, and, particularly repulsively, in brothels.
Without needing too much of a spoiler alert for those who may yet delve into the series, there is a delicious irony in that William Hurt brilliantly plays an elderly scientist, involved in the original synth programme, who now suffers under a robot matron sent in by the health service to look after him at home, and who turns out to be more prison camp guard than nurse.
Which is what prompted my double take at our front page yesterday. It reported: "Robots will one day be able to help humans get through everyday chores, such as baking a cake, if new research comes to fruition."
Aside from the fact that baking a cake hasn't been a daily chore since Mary Berry was in nappies, the next area of concern was that the research funding for the Glasgow University project was the US Office of Naval Research. The last time I checked the prime focus of research for the US Military involved dough, but not the type you would put in the oven.
Professor Philippe Schyns, the university's director of the Institute of Neuroscience and Psychology, said: "If robots of science fiction are to become reality they will need to be much more aware of their surroundings and be able to adapt to situations accordingly - to be more human essentially."
But by the time I read that it was too late. There was ingrained the prospect of an army of robotic home helps and elderly carers being dispatched to take care of folk the rest of us would rather not bother about. It's bad enough if it's your parents. In that case you might even have to get involved yourself. But for the rest, send in the friendly Daleks.
In the utopian view robots or synths or replicants or whatever would do dirty, dangerous jobs. But when did it become a paradigm that caring for our elderly fell into that category?
It should be seen as worthy and commendable work, essential to the social contract of society, paid the living wage and given full respect, otherwise we fail to respect our our elderly.
I'm no spring chicken but I listened in on a couple of older guys in a hospital ward this week. Laughing, joking, reminiscing. The home help robot who can do that is some way off, well beyond the singularity.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article