A few months ago, in January 2018, the European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee approved a report that outlines a possible legal framework to regulate the interactions between a) humans, and b) robots and Artificial Intelligence systems. The report is quite revolutionary. It proposes, e.g., giving certain types of robots and AI systems personhood, as "electronic persons": These electronic persons would have rights and obligations, and the report suggests that they should obey Isaac Asimov's Laws of Robotics. The report also advises that the manufacturers of robots and AI systems should build in a'kill switch' to be able to deactivate them. Another recommendation is that a European Agency for Robotics and AI be established that would be capable of responding to new opportunities and challenges arising from technological advancements in robotics. The EU is not alone in its desire to regulate AI: similar (though less far reaching) reports were published in Japan and in the UK.

A few months ago, in January 2018, the European Parliament's Legal Affairs Committee approved a report that outlines a possible legal framework to regulate the interactions between a) humans, and b) robots and Artificial Intelligence systems. The report is quite revolutionary. It proposes, e.g., giving certain types of robots and AI systems personhood, as "electronic persons": These electronic persons would have rights and obligations, and the report suggests that they should obey Isaac Asimov's Laws of Robotics. The report also advises that the manufacturers of robots and AI systems should build in a'kill switch' to be able to deactivate them. Another recommendation is that a European Agency for Robotics and AI be established that would be capable of responding to new opportunities and challenges arising from technological advancements in robotics. The EU is not alone in its desire to regulate AI: similar (though less far reaching) reports were published in Japan and in the UK.

Concerned that all discussion of computers focused on technology, Kling studied government, manufacturers and insurance companies to determine how computers affect society and require choices that consider human values as well as technological values. In his prolific writings and speeches, Kling often used analogies to the automobile to make his esoteric topic more easily understood. Technological debates could be likened to discussing the latest sports car model, he told The Times in 1992, while informatics addresses how the automobile has affected society, including construction of highways and development of suburbs. Kling's studies convinced him that "there is an underside to computer technology," he said. For example, he said that organizations often fail to train employees properly in computer use, making the task a "hassle and a cause of stress" and that dependency on computers for communication eliminates creative, stimulating social interaction.