Answers.Body: <p>For those times when AI does interact with humans, I believe that AI would be held at LEAST to the same standards humans are. The problem comes in when we ask "who is really to blame". If a self-driving car cuts you off in traffic and causes you to wreck, you can't take the AI in the car to court. Do you take the company? The programmer? The owner of the car? Some entity will likely be held responsible, the question is just which one. </p>
  
  <p>As for future human-like AI, I believe my answer still remains true. Having a human level AI changes the meaning of the word "entity". If a human-like AI breaks a law, it may be because it was programmed to do so. I don't think our current legal system is ready for such cases, but it have to evolve in the future. </p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-09-10T23:53:42.650Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2016-09-10T23:53:42.650Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Tyler Heldreth
Answers.Body: <p>As per the current legal system, if the AI agent were to be given a human citizenship, then yes, it would have to obey all laws as per the legislature of the country which provided the citizenship. If not then the entity who holds responsibility over its control and creation would be trialled (see also <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10825206/Owners-of-dogs-who-kill-face-up-to-14-years-jail.html" rel="nofollow">this scenario</a>).</p>
  
  <p>Having stated the above, it really is not as simple as it sounds. as @Tyler pointed out, the <em>entity</em> in here is not of a single person. If the AI agent were to take part in a malevolent act, then a more thorough investigation must be taken place than that for a human. If humanoid robots of free will were to roam our civilization, then our legal system ought to be expanded to cope up with possible real life anomalies that could occur.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2016-09-11T15:27:10.273Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2016-09-11T15:27:10.273Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Ébe Isaac
Body: <p>Assuming mankind will eventually create artificial humans, but in doing so have we put equal effort into how humans will relate to an artificial human, and what can we expect in return? This is happening in real-time as we place AI trucks and cars on the road. Do people have the right to question, maybe in court, if an AI machine breaks a law?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-09-11T08:55:19.527Z
Comments.Text: Like the Second Law in [tag:asimovs-laws]?
Comments.UserDisplayName: Mithical
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-09-11T09:15:22.750Z
Comments.Text: A problem here is we have already deployed AI killing machines in the form of autonomous drones.
Comments.UserDisplayName: D. Wade
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2016-09-11T09:16:16.310Z
Comments.Text: Well, we don't *have* Asimov's Laws yet. :) See [this question](http://ai.stackexchange.com/questions/1635/is-it-possible-to-implement-asimovs-three-laws-of-robotics).
Comments.UserDisplayName: Mithical
Tags: <philosophy><legal>
Title: When we create artificial life and artificial intelligence will we require it to obey human laws?
UserDisplayName: D. Wade
ThreadText: # When we create artificial life and artificial intelligence will we require it to obey human laws?
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2016-09-10)
  
  Assuming mankind will eventually create artificial humans, but in doing so have we put equal effort into how humans will relate to an artificial human, and what can we expect in return? This is happening in real-time as we place AI trucks and cars on the road. Do people have the right to question, maybe in court, if an AI machine breaks a law?
  
  **Tags:** philosophy, legal
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Like the Second Law in [tag:asimovs-laws]?  
  > **username_0**: A problem here is we have already deployed AI killing machines in the form of autonomous drones.  
  > **username_1**: Well, we don't *have* Asimov's Laws yet. :) See [this question](http://ai.stackexchange.com/questions/1635/is-it-possible-to-implement-asimovs-three-laws-of-robotics).  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_2 on 2016-09-10. Score: 3
  
  For those times when AI does interact with humans, I believe that AI would be held at LEAST to the same standards humans are. The problem comes in when we ask "who is really to blame". If a self-driving car cuts you off in traffic and causes you to wreck, you can't take the AI in the car to court. Do you take the company? The programmer? The owner of the car? Some entity will likely be held responsible, the question is just which one.
  
  As for future human-like AI, I believe my answer still remains true. Having a human level AI changes the meaning of the word "entity". If a human-like AI breaks a law, it may be because it was programmed to do so. I don't think our current legal system is ready for such cases, but it have to evolve in the future.
  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_3 on 2016-09-11. Score: 1
  
  As per the current legal system, if the AI agent were to be given a human citizenship, then yes, it would have to obey all laws as per the legislature of the country which provided the citizenship. If not then the entity who holds responsibility over its control and creation would be trialled (see also [this scenario](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10825206/Owners-of-dogs-who-kill-face-up-to-14-years-jail.html)).
  
  Having stated the above, it really is not as simple as it sounds. as @Tyler pointed out, the *entity* in here is not of a single person. If the AI agent were to take part in a malevolent act, then a more thorough investigation must be taken place than that for a human. If humanoid robots of free will were to roam our civilization, then our legal system ought to be expanded to cope up with possible real life anomalies that could occur.
  
  
  ---
  
  