Artificial intelligence gets tons of press – and for good reason. But AI's fast-rising expertise lies not just within the matrix of its own nifty algorithms, but also in its wider connections. It's about "intelligent connectivity" that relies on raw data – lots and lots of it – and on the communication networks that carry it. This blend of technologies may be surrounding you at a large store like Walmart. Retailers fight for their target audience using sensors galore, stationed in their aisles and checkout lines.

This report documents the history of research on AI rights and other moral consideration of artificial entities. It highlights key intellectual influences on this literature as well as research and academic discussion addressing the topic more directly. We find that researchers addressing AI rights have often seemed to be unaware of the work of colleagues whose interests overlap with their own. Academic interest in this topic has grown substantially in recent years; this reflects wider trends in academic research, but it seems that certain influential publications, the gradual, accumulating ubiquity of AI and robotic technology, and relevant news events may all have encouraged increased academic interest in this specific topic. We suggest four levers that, if pulled on in the future, might increase interest further: the adoption of publication strategies similar to those of the most successful previous contributors; increased engagement with adjacent academic fields and debates; the creation of specialized journals, conferences, and research institutions; and more exploration of legal rights for artificial entities.

The philosopher Mark Coeckelbergh has long been dealing with the development of intelligent machines and their effects on concepts of humanity, societal transformation and the ideology of the trans- and posthuman. His recent book AI Ethics (MIT Press, 2020) provides a survey of the most pressing moral questions opened up by these developments. Should we simply enjoy the new liberties generated by AI as future offers without any alternative? Where does selflessness end with respect to the machinic "other," and where should deliberations about a "trustworthy" AI start? Questions like these are tackled by Coeckelbergh in the following interview.

Meet Spot, the 160 lbs dog robot that can run, climb stairs and has an uncanny ability to maintain its balance. Designed by robotics company Boston Dynamics, there were heated discussions online when Google bought the company in 2013, with accusations that Google had gone against its "Don't be evil" motto by purchasing a company that had worked with the U.S. military and had close ties with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). Google motto 2004: Don't be evil Google motto 2010: Evil is tricky to define Google motto 2013: We make military robots But more recently, the conversation flared up again, most of it stemming from the video released this week showing Boston Dynamics employees trying to kick Spot over in order to show how robust it is. The video spread around the Internet like wildfire and raised questions about ethics, the future of robotics and Google's intentions. As robots begin to act and look more and more like living things, it's increasingly hard not to see them in that way.