Results tagged “laws” from kwc blog

4th Law of Robotics

  1. A robot may not harm a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
  2. A robot must obey the orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
  3. A robot must protect its own existence, as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
  4. "A robot must activate its red LED when disregarding the First, Second, or Third Law."

irobots.JPG hal.jpg terminator.jpg cylon.JPG

Sony recently cancelled the Qrio, an action that was attributed to cost-cutting and product division reorganization. Closer observers know that Sony was trying to forestall the robot uprising:


See also: RFC 3514 - The Security Flag in the IPv4 Header

While I'm on the topic of "laws"


Just after I made the previous post, I found this on Kottke:
What's Your Law?

There are a bunch of eponymous laws listed, some I recognize, some I don't. For example, there's Godwins Law (see below), which I seem to see mention on a daily basis now. Then there's Strogatz's Second Law of Doing Math (also see below), which I haven't heard of, but my bastardize corallary seems to backup my use of Google to verify Scalzi's quote :).

Godwin 's Law

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

Strogatz's Second Law of Doing Math

To figure out if something is true, check it on the computer. If the machine agrees with your own calculations, you're probably right.

Unattributed Bastard Corollary of Doing Research

To figure out if something is true, check it on the Google. If the machine agrees with your own research, you're probably right.

Law of Internet Invocation


metamanda reads John Scalzi's WHATEVER blog all the time, so I was pleasantly surprised to find this comment from Scalzi on Making Light (poppy z. brite thread)

Also, as a general rule, if you don't want someone to show up on your site, or in your discussion (or whatever), don't name the discussion (or whatever) after them (and especially, I would think, don't name them after authors, who are by nature curious about being fictional creatures in someone else's universe). Thanks to the twin powers of search engines and personal vanity, putting someone's name on something on the Internet is tantamount to inviting their presence, not unlike (depending on your perspective) invoking angels or demons. And we all know how much trouble that class of creature can be.

Henceforth, the above observation is to be known as the Law of Internet Invocation: "If you name them, they will come."

This is assuming no one else has yet made this observation (which I'm sure someone has). Posted by: John Scalzi on January 11, 2004 06:09 AM

I searched for "If you name them, they will come," and all I turned up was an Oct 2002 police report mentioning the names on a police warrant, so at the very least attributing this to Scalzi passes the Google Test, which does carry a certain level of omniscient certitude.

I found this quote to be serendipitous, given that metamanda's postings on her blog have summoned Scalzi, Paul Dourish, and others, which for me brings everything full circle. One of my postings attracted Eric Meyer's attention, but only due to it's incorrect attribution which he kindly corrected (by giving the credit to someone else). My postings have also managed to attract the attention of submitters to the Style Invitational, Khleo generics fans (but probably the man himself?), and who knows who else. Go Google/Technorati/Trackback!

Update: Scalzi's own post on the matter. Also, more on eponymous laws in the next thread.