Visitors to the World Exhibition in Aichi, Japan have the chance to meet some extraordinary creatures. On entering visitors are already greeted by a neat lady robot, fully conversant with four languages. Further on, in the actual exhibition, one can see machines that resemble people playing musical instruments. Will the vision or–the real nightmare, according to one's point of view–that manlike robots live among us, soon become reality? Or are such robots still just exceptional toys?

Positive attitudes

These and similar questions stood at the centre of a panel discussion, organised by the Tagesanzeiger, a Zurich daily newspaper, within the framework of the "Welten des Wissens" ("Worlds of Knowledge") exhibition in Zurich last week. The provoking question to kick off the discussion was: "Is homo sapiens an end-of-the-line model?" and it aroused the interest of a wide audience. No controversial discussion ensued, despite the distinguished circle of experts sitting on the panel. One reason for this was certainly that the four participants had positive attitudes to technology in general and robots in particular.

In addition, the panel's definition of the term "robot" was so loose that at times the debate became somewhat fuzzy. The question, raised by Barbara Reye who chaired the discussion, as to whether the vision of robots looking after the elderly was a frightening possibility or not, got a negative answer from the panel–with references to installations already employed in the care of the sick and elderly, such as chair lifts and drug drips.

Blueprints highlight deficiencies

There are various reasons why the panellists do not see intelligent robots as a threat. There was simply no point, said Thomas Christaller, Director of the Fraunhofer Institute for Autonomous Intelligent Systems, to replicate human beings, "after all, there's already a simple way to do this, one that has proved to be very successful".

Rolf Pfeifer, Director of the Laboratory for Artificial Intelligence at the University of Zurich agreed with him. "People are good at lots of things but never really excel in anything. But we don't need machines that are mediocre in all areas." It has been the case for a long time that machines are better than people in certain areas–bows and arrows, for instance, are more useful to hunt than bare fists.

Discussing the future of AI (from left): Rolf Pfeifer (Laboratory for Artificial Intelligence, University of Zurich), Thomas Christaller (Fraunhofer Institute for Autonomous Intelligent Systems), Barbara Reye (Tagesanzeiger), David Gugerli (Institute of History at ETH Zurich) and Frank Prengel (Microsoft). large

This example shows that man has a long history of trying to overcome his limitations with the use of technology. For him as a historian, added David Gugerli, Professor for the History of Technology at the ETH Zurich, blueprints of machines were of great interest. "They reflect the places where society perceives a deficit."

In principle, robotics today addressed two fundamental questions, explained Thomas Christaller. "On the one hand, nature is consulted and taken as a model to improve technical appliances. On the other, researchers hope to gain insights into the functioning of biological systems by constructing artificial forms of life. These two aspects should not be confused, however. After all, one doesn't expect an Airbus to lay eggs either".

Distressing processes

Frank Prengel, physicist at Microsoft and self-avowed transhumanist, saw himself filling the role of the devil's advocate in the circle of panellists. He propagated the opinion that what needed to be done today was to continue human evolution by the means of technology in order to overcome our biological limitations. The view that death has a biological purpose was not one he subscribed to. "Ageing and dying are distressing processes for most people," he said somewhat technocratically. That the planet, with a population that lives longer than today, would be threatened is something that Prengel–with tenacious consistency–hardly considers a serious problem. In the long run, there were other planets that one could colonise.