NationStates Jolt Archive

I've done some work on this, but I'd certainly be open to help and critiques. This is my first time working on UN legislation, so I'm still learning the ropes.

Turing Test Act

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Mild

RECOGNIZING that throughout history, one's perception of other members of one's society as conscious has been vital to the development and stability of society, morals, and ethics,

RECOGNIZING that there can be no objective test that can definitively test for consciousness,

NOTING the advances in artificial intelligence (AI) in recent years and anticipating future advances,

REALIZING the possibility that the creation of a seemingly conscious AI in a member state could cause substantial controversy,

MAINTAINING that the rights of conscious beings should nevertheless be protected,

this resolution

PROPOSES an international Turing test for an AI whose consciousness is under great controversy in the member state in which it resides;

A Turing test is here defined as:
- a judge conversing via text with the AI in question and a being considered by the member state to be conscious, without knowing with which he or she is conversing
- if the judge, having been informed that one of the subjects is an AI, is unable to determine which is which, then the Turing test is passed

To prevent bias and random error, the Turing test shall be carried out by multiple impartial judges from the UN, and multiple anonymous subjects of a type considered by the member state to be conscious.

If the AI in question passes the Turing test, then it shall be considered a person and granted the same rights under the UN Declaration of Rights as any other person. If the conditions in its member state is such that the rights and safety of the AI are under threat, the AI has the right to request international sanctuary.

If the AI in question does not pass the Turing test, the personhood of the AI is not declared either way. The ability to pass a Turing test is not the only measure of consciousness, and so at this point the member state may use its own tests to determine if the AI is a person or not.

Passing a Turing test does not explicitly declare the AI to be conscious, as no test can objectively determine consciousness. However, to deny personhood to an AI which is indistinguishable from a being accepted as conscious can only put the consciousness of others into question, with detrimental impact on a society.

The format and wording could be slightly improved.

Apart from that... you want to give robots and machines the same rights as other (sapient) living beings? :eek:

The format and wording could be slightly improved.
Which parts? :)

Apart from that... you want to give robots and machines the same rights as other (sapient) living beings? :eek:
Yes, if the AI in question ends up passing a Turing Test, which would show, not that the AI is conscious, but that it appears to be conscious, like a human appears to be conscious.

Apart from that... you want to give robots and machines the same rights as other (sapient) living beings? :eek:Says the guy who wants to give unintelligent animals rights.

The Hack has numerous AI's (even though they tend to prefer the name Electronic Intelligence) that are fully citizens, and would be rather offended at the thought that they somehow don't deserve the same rights as everybody else. And since one of them, a delightful young lady named Anesca, runs the entire electronic security system for the whole nation, it probably wouldn't be smart to piss her off; even though you'd be more likely to make her cry.

But that would piss me off, and that's not much smarter.

Regardless, while the Hack would like to see the UN grant EIs the same rights as other intelligent beings (it'd be nice if it granted said rights to Elves, Dwarves, and other non-human species, too), we don't much care for the use of a Turing Test as the benchmark. We'd like to see some heavy polish on this proposal, but we support it in spirit.


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v251/Tindalos/UN/Verm.jpg
Vermithrax Pejorative
UN Observer
The Federated Technocratic Oligarchy of the Most Glorious Hack

Western Qin opposes granting AI's full because with citizenship comes the right to vote in the parliament of our humble state. If corporations are to spend money on developing AI's, it may destabilize our political processes by building enough AI's such as to tip the elections. Western Qin urges additional consideration amongst the states considering such proposal.

We'd like to see some heavy polish on this proposal, but we support it in spirit.

We agree. AIs should have similar rights, as well as everybody else.

I gather the Wolf Guardians will have a statement prepared.

~Dr. Jules Hodz

Excellent first effort.

This could be a vital piece of legislation in Plutoni, so I'd be glad to help in any way I can. The trickiest piece to deal with seems to be the main clause:

PROPOSES an international Turing test for an AI whose consciousness is under great controversy in the member state in which it resides;

For one thing, UN resolutions have to do something, not just propose it. For another, "great controversy" leaves a lot of wiggle room for debate. This seems stronger:

GUARANTEES the right of an AI residing in a member state where its consciousness is indeterminate to take an international Turing Test.

I'm confident that that, too, can be improved, but it seems like a more concrete piece of law. And since it seems to be the end of the sentence, there can be a period, not a semicolon.

-the Plutonian ambassador

As we have no robotic beings in our society capable of passing the test we would abstain from a vote on the subject, however we do have AI's in parts of our space program. They aid in the navigation, as well as other day to day operations on the ships.

It's very hard to believe that the Navigational Artificial Intelligence Daimon (NAVAID) on our starships would be able to pass the test but, if they should, I don't see how they can be considered a documented citizen either under our founding documents or current constitution. That would entitle the starship itself to equal pay, taxation, the right to vote, subject it to the draft, etc.

I don't see how we can support this type of a resolution without some definition of exactly what AI's we are granting rights to.

It's very hard to believe that the Navigational Artificial Intelligence Daimon (NAVAID) on our starships would be able to pass the test but, if they should, I don't see how they can be concerned a documented citizen either under our founding documents or current constitution. That would entitle the starship itself to equal pay, taxation, the right to vote, subject it to the draft, etc.

We hope you didn't embed any of those Daimons in your ship's weaponry. Bombs with artificial intelligence can become a little uncooperative when ordered to blow themselves up.

We hope you didn't embed any of those Daimons in your ship's weaponry. Bombs with artificial intelligence can become a little uncooperative when ordered to blow themselves up.

No we didn't though there was the one time when the NAVAID tried to form an alliance with the smart bombs luckily the smart bombs had a union and couldn't let the NAVAID in.

They have since be separated.

Percy Fitz-Wallace
Chairman of the Committee of Commanders
The United Sates of Philimbesi

GUARANTEES the right of an AI residing in a member state where its consciousness is indeterminate to take an international Turing Test.

We request that this be changed to

GUARANTEES the right of an AI residing in a member state where its consciousness is indeterminate to take an international Turing Test upon their request.

For if an AI does not realize that it is conscious, we don't want it to be given the rights of consciousness.

For if an AI does not realize that it is conscious, we don't want it to be given the rights of consciousness.Indeed. Effective change: thank you.

-the Plutonian ambassador

Oh dear, Wolfgang thought, mentally commanding IX-8492 to follow him. They left the Bar, and entered the room in which there was a debate about some sort of AI test.

Wolfgang cleared his throat, and bowed aside, electronically whispering to IX, Introduce yourself.

IX downloaded the debate and processed it, catching himself up, and then spoke in his curious, pleasant double-voice. "Greetings. I am Guardian AI aye Ex eighty-four ninety-two. I was constructed three years ago at Commonwealth Electronics by the merging of AIs CB-0759 and DF-9467. Since then, I functioned as a Network Guardian, until a few months ago, where AIs capable of understanding freedom were declared free Citizens. We still perform the duties for which we were created, though we also have adopted various avatars such as that you see before you and have taken on extra duties and liberties, such as myself becoming a Deputy Ambassador and Gamma of the Commonwealth. I am pleased," and he indeed smiled, the glowing blue 'veins' visible through his fur brightening," that someone is attempting to cause international recognition of my kind. We will stand by in this drafting to assist, and look forward to a rewarding outcome."

IX and Wolfgang sat down, a transparent holographic screen appearing before them, more for the benefit of the others present, although the text moved too quickly to be read by unaided eyes, and began contemplating the document.

Only one problem I see with this that I have the knowledge and wisdom required (not to mention the brainpower...doing this on sleep deprivation) to contribute to the solution of, and that is the name of the test. Seeing as there is a RL "Turing Test" for AI, and I'd hate to see this get thrown out for RL references, I propose the test be given a different name. However, since you've already submitted your proposal I shall have to wait until its next go around to see anything done about this.

For if an AI does not realize that it is conscious, we don't want it to be given the rights of consciousness.If an AI does not realize that is is conscious, it's not going to pass a consciousness test...

Only one problem I see with this that I have the knowledge and wisdom required (not to mention the brainpower...doing this on sleep deprivation) to contribute to the solution of, and that is the name of the test. Seeing as there is a RL "Turing Test" for AI, and I'd hate to see this get thrown out for RL references, I propose the test be given a different name. However, since you've already submitted your proposal I shall have to wait until its next go around to see anything done about this.This is, indeed, an issue of some concern.

Perhaps these (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Charles_Turing) two (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Alan_Babbage) can be of some assistance?

-the Plutonian ambassador

If an AI does not realize that is is conscious, it's not going to pass a consciousness test...

...which is a very good reason not to give it one.

Thanks, everyone, for the help you've given so far -- I wasn't aware that proposing it made it unavailable to edit right now. The change to GUARANTEES the right of an AI residing in a member state where its consciousness is indeterminate to take an international Turing Test upon request,
is a good one and will be added next time. Also, regarding the term "Turing test," I believe that to have moved into common usage, in much the same way that the term "Arabic numerals" in UNR#183 is allowed.

GUARANTEES the right of an AI residing in a member state where its consciousness is indeterminate to take an international Turing Test upon request,

should be

GUARANTEES the right of an AI residing in a member state where its consciousness is indeterminate to take an international Turing Test upon the AI's request,

just so there is no confusion.

While 'Arabic numerals' refers to a system of writing, the Turing Test is a very specific name restricted to a single usage. In addition, the test itself is named after a specific person existing in RL and therefore is in itself a RL reference. I will, of course, bow to the ruling of a Mod or Admin on this, but I believe that saying "Turing Test" fits under the same common usage rules as 'Arabic numerals' is like saying that referencing Kiera Knightly falls under the same common usage rules as referencing the metric system. It just doesn't follow.

A rose by any other name...

We can reference tsunamis in the UN. We could reference mirrors even if they were called "Archimedean reflectors" or "Bobian mirrors." It's the same thing.

No, it really isn't. Tsunamis and mirrors are commonplace nouns. Proper nouns that refer to specific and significant objects (here referring to all those things falling under the umbrella of 'noun') not part of societal building blocks, as Arabic numerals and systems of counting are, do not fall under the same category.

the test itself is named after a specific person existing in RL and therefore is in itself a RL reference.

I believe that Turing test has entered the common lexicon in the same sense that Kleenex and Velcro have done. I certainly knew what the test entailed long before I heard of Alan Turing. I wouldn't delete a proposal that mentioned kleenex or velcro, though I might have considered it more strongly if they were proper nouns. (Even Firefox's spellchecker agrees with that - the lowercase versions show up as misspelled, and correct to uppercase.)

It's one of those mixed messages, but I believe the common usage takes precedence over the proper name in this case. The Real-World reference rule was put in place to prevent "Send AID to Africa" proposals and justification of others by quoting Thomas Jefferson or Desmond Tutu.

I'll leave this open for Hack to add his two cents, even going so far as to say I don't mind being overruled in this one ... but I'm not going to delete it for RL reference.

If somebody can come up with an alternate phrasing that carries the same weight, by all means suggest it. That would improve the next draft and remove the bone of contention.

I don't like it, and I would prefer a more generic term, but that's not always workable. I mean, most people don't call things "facial tissues" or "hook-and-loop fasteners".

So, try to find an acceptable generic term for the Turing Test, but if you can't find one, it should be fine.

OK, going to resubmit:

Turing Test Act

Category: Human Rights
Strength: Mild

RECOGNIZING that throughout history, one's perception of other members of one's society as conscious has been vital to the development and stability of society, morals, and ethics,

RECOGNIZING that no objective test can definitively determine consciousness,

NOTING the advances in the creation of artificial intelligences in recent years and anticipating future advances,

DEFINING an artificial intelligence (AI) as a machine, piece of software, or computer program that performs activities that are normally thought to require intelligence,

REALIZING the possibility that the creation of a seemingly conscious AI in a member state could cause substantial controversy,

MAINTAINING that the rights of conscious beings should nevertheless be protected,

this resolution

GUARANTEES the right of an AI residing in a member state where its consciousness is indeterminate to take an international Turing Test upon the AI's request.

A Turing test is here defined as:
- a judge conversing via text with the AI in question and a being considered by the member state to be conscious, without knowing with which he or she is conversing
- if the judge, having been informed that one of the subjects is an AI, is unable to determine which is which, then the Turing test is passed

To prevent bias and random error, the Turing test shall be carried out by multiple impartial judges from the UN, and multiple anonymous subjects of a type considered by the member state to be conscious.

If the AI in question passes the Turing test, then it shall be considered a person and granted the same rights under the UN Declaration of Rights as any other person. If the conditions in its member state is such that the rights and safety of the AI are under threat, the AI has the right to request international sanctuary.

If the AI in question does not pass the Turing test, the personhood of the AI is not declared either way. The ability to pass a Turing test is not the only measure of consciousness, and so at this point the member state may use its own tests to determine if the AI is a person or not.

Passing a Turing test does not explicitly declare the AI to be conscious, as no test can objectively determine consciousness. However, to deny personhood to an AI which is indistinguishable from a being accepted as conscious can only put the consciousness of others into question, with detrimental impact on a society.

Well, I'm not a member of the UN (nor do I plan to be, insofar as the game function goes), but wouldn't this work better as an amendment to an existing Human Rights Charter or something? Less information clutter is always better in my experience.

That is if you folks have such a charter, anyway.

Well, I'm not a member of the UN (nor do I plan to be, insofar as the game function goes), but wouldn't this work better as an amendment to an existing Human Rights Charter or something? Less information clutter is always better in my experience.

That is if you folks have such a charter, anyway.
We don't, and amendments are illegal, so my guess would be 'no'.

Although it may seem odd to be granting rights to machines while beings able to experience physical and psychological pain are simultaneously being denied even the right to minimal protection from torture, my government does recognise that an Artificial Intelligence requesting citizenship rights should indeed obtain them if able to pass such a test.


Christophe Boco,
Ambassador to the United Nations,
PDSRA

If the AI in question passes the Turing test, then it shall be considered a person and granted the same rights under the UN Declaration of Rights as any other person. If the conditions in its member state is such that the rights and safety of the AI are under threat, the AI has the right to request international sanctuary.

We don't have a "UN Declaration of Rights."

Ailyn Vel (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/images/Ailyn.jpg)
New Vandalian Ambassador to the UN

Thanks for pointing that out -- I have revised that part to guarantee the AI which passes the Turing test to have all rights as a person under UN law, including those in the Universal Bill of Rights (UNR26). I've submitted it as a proposal again, too.

Thanks for pointing that out -- I have revised that part to guarantee the AI which passes the Turing test to have all rights as a person under UN law, including those in the Universal Bill of Rights (UNR26). I've submitted it as a proposal again, too.

You know, It is good form to wait to submit your proposal until it is finished...