This is the PARO baby seal robot. It's used in nursing homes and with dementia patients. It's been around for a while.
这是帕罗婴儿海豹机器人。它被用于疗养院来陪伴老年痴呆症患者。它已经面世有阵子了。
And I remember, years ago, being at a party and telling someone about this robot,
我记得若干年前,在参与的一次聚会上跟人讲到这个机器人时,
and her response was, "Oh my gosh. That's horrible. I can't believe we're giving people robots instead of human care."
她的反应往往是,“哦,天哪。太可怕了。我无法相信我们给人们的是机器人护理,而不是人类护理。”
And this is a really common response, and I think it's absolutely correct, because that would be terrible.
这是一个非常普遍的反应,我觉得这是完全正确的,因为这可能会很可怕。
But in this case, it's not what this robot replaces.
但在这个场景下,机器人替代的不是护理。
What this robot replaces is animal therapy in contexts where we can't use real animals but we can use robots,
机器人替代的是动物疗法,这可以用在无法使用真正动物,但可以使用机器人的场合中,
because people will consistently treat them more like an animal than a device.
因为人们会把它们当成动物而不是设备看待。
Acknowledging this emotional connection to robots can also help us anticipate challenges
承认这种与机器人的情感联系也能帮助我们预见到挑战,
as these devices move into more intimate areas of people's lives.
随着这些设备将进入人们生活中更亲密的领域。
For example, is it OK if your child's teddy bear robot records private conversations?
比如,用你孩子的玩具熊机器人录制私人对话是否合适?
Is it OK if your sex robot has compelling in-app purchases?
你的性爱机器人有强制的内置付费系统是否合适?
Because robots plus capitalism equals questions around consumer protection and privacy.
因为机器人加上资本就等于消费者保护和隐私问题。
And those aren't the only reasons that our behavior around these machines could matter.
这些还不是我们对待这些机器人的行为之所以重要的唯一原因。
A few years after that first initial experience I had with this baby dinosaur robot,
在我第一次见到这只小恐龙机器人的几年后,
I did a workshop with my friend Hannes Gassert.
我和朋友汉内斯·加瑟特开展了一次研讨会。
And we took five of these baby dinosaur robots and we gave them to five teams of people.
我们拿了5个小恐龙机器人,把它们分给5队人。
And we had them name them and play with them and interact with them for about an hour.
我们让他们为它们取名,陪伴它们一起互动大约一个小时。
And then we unveiled a hammer and a hatchet and we told them to torture and kill the robots.
然后我们拿出了斧头和锤子,让他们去折磨和杀死机器人。