Critique of Asimov's "I, Robot"

Isaac Asimov excites readers with the ability to read "I, Robot". Of course, much of Asimov's idea brings suspicion to this story. But when the plot is completely inconsistent with the law he wrote, the story gets confused. On the surface, his story has a legal and logical meaning and seems to be entertaining the audience a lot. However, further analysis of the story shows that there are several major flaws in this work.

Isaac Asimov asked similar questions in his book "I, Robots" (a summary of robot stories). In his book Asimov asked how robots treat "the three laws of robots" which are "manufactured and protected to protect the robot from harm". It is not so obvious to answer this question, "What is it that does not harm human beings?" Therefore, he added a provision and called it the '0 th rule'. Let's talk about "the occurrence of harm to humans due to inaction". Can we claim that complete destruction of nature's balance is destruction of mankind? Then, how about over consumption of Western countries? Imagine that 7 billion people can survive because 100 million people will die. Can you do what you need?

Fantasy science fiction writer Isaac Asimov was one of the first people to recognize this awkward risk. In 1942's short novel "Runaround" which was later reissued at the collection "I, Robot" in 1950, Asiov called what we call "three rules of robot" to protect us from the effects of artificial descendants I mentioned in detail. . First: The robot does not hurt human beings, and people do not hurt others by not doing anything. Second, the robot must obey human orders unless it violates the first law. Third: The robot must protect itself, but only within the extent that it does not contradict the first and second laws.

In 1940, Isaac Asimov announced a series of short stories for the Super Science Stories Magazine. This includes robots that generate children who are responsible for protection. Feeling Asimov is in charge of developing three methods of robot. These instructions (1) The robot should not harm human beings. (2) As long as the robot does not comply with the first law, it must obey instructions given by humans. (3) The robot must protect its existence unless this protection is consistent with the first law or the second law. (James Isam, robotics.megagiant.com)