Even Issac Asimov considered the three laws as incomplete. He added a fourth law in “Robots and Empire.” “A robot cannot cause harm to mankind or, by inaction, allow mankind to come to harm.”

https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/4/24025535/google-ai-robot-constitution-autort-deepmind-three-laws

Google wrote a ‘Robot Constitution’ to make sure its new AI droids won’t kill us

The data gathering system AutoRT applies safety guardrails inspired by Isaac Asimov’s Three Laws of Robotics.

(Related) Thinking about AI…

https://cosmosinstitute.substack.com/p/existential-pessimism-vs-accelerationism

Existential Pessimism vs. Accelerationism: Why Tech Needs a Rational, Humanistic "Third Way"

… As technologists, we should feel a sense of urgency at this moment. AI has opened a new continent, and humanity is setting foot on its shores. How we explore this unmapped terrain with its opportunities and dangers will shape the course of civilization.

A Mean Between Two Extremes

Two notions of technology currently dominate our culture: existential pessimism and accelerationism. I’ll argue that neither presents a genuinely positive vision for humanity's future.

Existential pessimism, an apocalyptic, almost eschatological warning of risk, animated by quantification, dominates many practitioner circles. Like Oppenheimer, some of AI’s earliest creators now denounce their creation in hubristic awe of their own power. They advocate for the rationalist remaking of society based on risk avoidance.

On the other hand, accelerationism argues that economic growth and technological progress are the sole ends of human life. Humanity is reduced to a variable in a thermodynamic equation, a link in an evolutionary chain. The dignity of the individual, rooted in both classical ideas of virtue and liberal notions of freedom, is forgotten. They say we must liberate AI from human guidance. That we must unleash its development. Material uplift becomes a shallow substitute for virtue and human flourishing.