Studio guest: Prof. Sarah Spiekermann, Information Systems expert
Sarah Spiekermann is a computer scientist from the Vienna University of Economics and Business whose research focuses on the relationship between humans and machines.
"We have to be careful, to what extent humans will maintain control over machines and most importantly, they have to have the last word over how the machine acts."
DW-TV: Scientists have developed autonomous robots that can exchange information among each other. Their task is to find sources of nutrition on a playing field.These robots can "reproduce", in the sense that they can pass on their programs to other robots. Ultimately, the swarm robots display some human-like behavior. They commit fraud and engage in nepotism. That means a principle from nature, evolution, is working well in programming. Is that the trend we can actually see there for the future?
Sarah Spiekermann: I think that is certainly one trend in programming. However, the question is where you apply it and whether you will use it in robotics. Especially when machines like robots interact with people, and not only between each other, then the question is to what extent you can really use evolutionary programming.
DW-TV: This means that the engineers do not really know what's happening inside the machine?
Sarah Spiekermann: To a certain extent, that is probably true. Or it would be very complex to understand afterwards how the machine acts or why it acted in a certain way. And for that reason the liability of who's responsible, finally, for the behavior of the machine is an open question.
DW-TV: Of course evolution does not end, and we could also imagine the robots going through an evolution 'til they maybe, someday, take over? Is that possible?
Sarah Spiekermann: That’s science fiction. But of course we have to be careful, to what extent humans will maintain control over machines -- any kind of machines, not only robots. And I think we have to inform people, we have to give them choices, we have to give them even access to the machines, and most importantly, they have to have the last word over how the machine acts.
DW-TV: Cars have been developed that actually interfere when the driver is not putting on the brakes. The car, by itself will say, "Stop! Brake!" Are we handing over too much control to the machine in this case?
Sarah Spiekermann: In this particular case, security experts will always argue, and also insurance companies, that machines are sometimes faster in their way to react.
DW-TV: So it's an advantage?
Sarah Spiekermann: Well, but there are other examples, like that you're forced to put on a seatbelt and that you get signs of warning that are a nuisance to drivers. And the question there is, for example, as well whether the machine should take over or whether people should have the choice to switch off the system.
DW-TV: And you think you can make sure in our world that man will always have the last decision to take with machines?
Sarah Spiekermann: I think that is a key question of our time. How far should automation go? And it shouldn't be left to alchemy, how far control goes.
DW-TV: And do you have examples where the control is already too far with the machine?
Sarah Spiekermann: I think the seatbelt is one example, but another is debated today in the aircraft. Should a pilot be replaced by a fully-automated system or not? Just right now we have a debate around this topic, and I think finally it is a question how much we trust human beings to be good decision-makers.
(Interview: Ingolf Baur)
