Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gvvz8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T14:07:42.911Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Regulating the Tyrell Corporation: the Emergence of Novel Beings

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 2021

David R Lawrence  and
Sarah Morley
David R Lawrence*
Affiliation:
Centre for Biomedicine, Self and Society, Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, EdinburghEH8 9LN, Scotland
Sarah Morley
Affiliation:
Newcastle Law School, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon TyneNE1 7RU, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author. Email: d.lawrence@ed.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Emerging biotechnologies and advances in computer science promise the arrival of novel beings possessed of some degree of moral status, even potentially sentient or sapient life. Such a manifestation will constitute an epochal change, and perhaps threaten Homo sapiens’ status as the only being generally considered worthy of personhood and its contingent protections; as well as being the root of any number of social and legal issues. The law as it stands is not likely to be capable of managing or adapting to this challenge. This paper highlights the likely societal ramifications of novel beings and the gaps in the legislation which is likely to be relied upon to respond to these. In so doing, the authors make a case for the development of new regulatory structures to manage the moral issues surrounding this new technological upheaval.

Keywords

Novel BeingsPersonhoodTechnology Regulation
Type
Articles
Information
Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics , Volume 30 , Issue 3 , July 2021 , pp. 421 - 434
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Notes

1. Digital Culture, Media and Sport Committee. Disinformation and ‘fake news’ (Final Report, HC 1791, 2019); Hern A, Cambridge analytica scandal ‘highlights need for AI regulation (The Guardian, 16 Apr 2018); available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/16/cambridge-analytica-scandal-highlights-need-for-ai-regulation (last accessed 26 Nov 2019).

2. Liptak A, Sent to prison by a software program’s secret algorithms (Nytimes.com 1 May, 2018); available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/01/us/politics/sent-to-prison-by-a-software-programs-secret-algorithms.html (last accessed 26 Nov 2019).

3. Marwala, T, Hurwitz, E, Artificial Intelligence And Economic Theory: Skynet In The Market (Springer 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4. Embarking on this was the purpose of a Wellcome Trust funded pilot project (WT 208871/Z/17/Z) run by the present authors, which has led to a forthcoming major bid.

5. Blade Runner (Screenplay) (Hauer R, Scott R, Fancher H, Peoples D 1981).

6. Emonson DR Vanderbeek, The use of amphetamines in U.S. air force tactical operations during desert shield and storm (1995) 66 Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine; Shachtman N, Lockheed unleashes ‘HULC’ super-strength gear (WIRED, 27 February 2009); available at: https://www.wired.com/2009/02/lockheed-exo (last accessed 26 Nov 2019); Raytheon unveils lighter, faster, stronger second generation exoskeleton robotic suit (Raytheon, 27 Sept 2010); available at: http://multivu.prnewswire.com/mnr/raytheon/46273/ (last accessed 26 Nov 2019).

7. Pells R, More UK students turning to banned ‘brain boosting’ drug than ever before (The Independent, 6 June 2016); available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/student/student-life/noopept-study-drug-legal-high-banned-brain-boosting-students-record-numbers-a7068071.html (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

8. Providing a list of all anti doping rule violations (Ukad.org.uk, 2016); available at: http://ukad.org.uk/anti-doping-rule-violations/current-violations/ (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

9. Rather than by a ‘backdoor’ —for instance, we are sold various technologies to ease our lives which are by any understanding ‘human enhancements’ —see Lawrence DR, To what extent is the use of human enhancements defended in international human rights legislation? (2013) 13 Medical Law International 254 —but rarely if ever are we told explicitly that this is their function.

10. The north sense: intelligently designed evolution by cyborg nest (Cyborg Nest, 2018); available at: https://cyborgnest.net/ (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

11. BioTeq - Human Re-Engineering NFC RFID Implants. (Bioteq, 2019); available at: https://www.bioteq.co.uk (last accessed 28 Nov 2019).

12. Liu, Y, Shin, HD, Li, J, Liu, L.Toward metabolic engineering in the context of system biology and synthetic biology: Advances and prospects. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology 2014;99:1109Google ScholarPubMed.

13. For example Roberts M, Scientists build ‘synthetic embryos’ (BBC News 3 November 2019); available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-43960363 (last accessed 27 Nov 2019); Knapton S, Artificial human life could soon be grown in lab after embryo breakthrough (The Telegraph March 2, 2017); available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/03/02/artificial-human-life-could-soon-grown-lab-embryo-breakthrough/ (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

14. Hernandez D, The man behind the google brain: andrew ng and the quest for the new AI (WIRED, 2013); available at: http://www.wired.com/2013/05/neuro-artificial-intelligence/ (last accessed 14 Sept 2017).

15. Knight W, The dark secret at the heart of AI (MIT Technology Review April 11, 2017); available at: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/604087/the-dark-secret-at-the-heart-of-ai/ (last accessed 27 Nov 2019). It is worth pointing out that this ‘unknown’ may on some level be deliberately overplayed as the programmers provided the AI with the tools by which it performs these actions. However, it is true that these AI are using those tools in unforeseen ways.

16. Pressman A, Deciding whether to fear or celebrate google’s mind-blowing AI demo (Fortune 10 May, 2018); available at: http://fortune.com/2018/05/10/google-duplex-ai-demo/ (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

17. Lawrence, DR, More human than human Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2017 26:476CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18. Dymova, L, Sevastjanov, P, Kaczmarek, K. A Forex trading expert system based on a new approach to the rule-base evidential reasoning. Expert Systems with Applications. 2016 1;51:1–3CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19. Zhu, W, Miao, J, Hu, J, Qing, L. Vehicle detection in driving simulation using extreme learning machine. Neurocomputing 2014;27;128:160–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20. Davis R, Silva A, Automatic and predictive management of electronic messages (2018) US Patent 9,894,026.

21. Gomez-Uribe, CA, Hunt, N. The netflix recommender system: Algorithms, business value, and innovation. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems 2015 28;6(4):1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

22. Cuddy, C. Expert systems: The technology of knowledge management and decision making for the 21st century Library Journal 2002 127(16) 82Google Scholar.

23. Searle, J.R. Minds, brains, and programs Behavioral and Brain Sciences 1980;3:417CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

24. Forgy, C, Rete: A fast algorithm for the many pattern/many object pattern match problem Artificial Intelligence 1982;19:17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

25. Kurzweil, R. The Singularity is Near New York: Viking Press; 2005Google Scholar.

26. Newell A, Simon H, Computer science as empirical inquiry: symbols and search (1976) 19 Communications of the ACM 113.

27. Allen P, Paul Allen: the singularity isn’t near (MIT Technology Review October 12, 2011); available at: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/425733/paul-allen-the-singularity-isnt-near/ (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

28. Kurzweil R, Kurzweil Responds: don’t underestimate the singularity (MIT Technology Review October 20, 2011); available at: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/425818/kurzweil-responds-dont-underestimate-the-singularity/ (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

29. Markram, H, et al. Reconstruction and simulation of neocortical microcircuitry Cell 2015;163: 456CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

30. op cit note 14.

31. Clark L, Google’s Artificial brain learns to find cat videos (WIRED June 26, 2012); available at: http://www.wired.com/2012/06/google-x-neural-network (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

32. Wavenet launches in the google assistant | deepmind (DeepMind, 2018); available at: https://deepmind.com/blog/wavenet-launches-google-assistant/ (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

33. Russell, S, Norvig, P, Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach 2nd edn, Prentice Hall 2003 at 320–363Google Scholar.

34. Cambria, E, White, B, Jumping NLP curves: a review of natural language processing research IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine 2014;9:48CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35. Op cit 33 at 537–81, 863–98.

36. Langley, P, The changing science of machine learning Machine Learning 2011;82:275CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37. “A Knowledge modeling and machine reasoning environment capable of addressing the most challenging problems in industry, government, and academia.” Cycorp —making solutions better (Cycorp, 2016); available at: http://www.cyc.com/ (last accessed 27 Nov 2019); The Word: Common Sense (New Scientist April 11, 2006); available at: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19025471.700-the-word-common-sense/ (last accessed 27 Nov 2019). We thank John Harris for informing us of this fascinating endeavor.

38. Benner, SA, Sismour, AM. Synthetic biology. Nature Reviews Genetics. 2005;6(7):533–43CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

39. Osbourn, AE, O’Maille, PE, Rosser, SJ, Lindsey, K. Synthetic biology. New Phytologist. 2012;196(3):671–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

40. Hutchison, CA, Chuang, RY, Noskov, VN, Assad-Garcia, N, Deerinck, TJ, Ellisman, MH, et al. Design and synthesis of a minimal bacterial genome. Science. 25;351:6280Google Scholar.

41. ibid.

42. See Christiansen, A. Synthetic biology and the moral significance of artificial life: A reply to Douglas, Powell and Savulescu. Bioethics. 2016;30(5):372–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

43. Boldt, J, Müller, O. Nature biotechnology. 2008;26(4):387–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44. Op cit 42.

45. See Gómez‐Tatay, L, Hernández‐Andreu, JM, Aznar, J. A personalist ontological approach to synthetic biology. Bioethics. 2016;30(6):397-406CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

46. Boeke, JD, Church, G, Hessel, A, Kelley, NJ, Arkin, A, Cai, Y et al. The genome project-write. Science. 2016 Jul 8;353(6295):126–7CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

47. Radford T, Davis N, Scientists launch proposal to create synthetic human genome (The Guardian, 2016); available at: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2016/jun/02/scientists-launch-proposal-to-create-synthetic-human-genome-dna (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

48. See the Opinion of the European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies to the European Commission, Ethics of Synthetic Biology (No25, 2013) p 81.

49. op cit 33 Ch. 26.3 passim.

50. Yudkowski, E, Artificial intelligence as a positive and negative factor in global risk, Global Catastrophic Risks Oxford University Press 2011; 184Google Scholar.

51. Bostrom, N, Ethical issues in advanced artificial intelligence, in Smit, I, et al. (eds) Cognitive, Emotive and Ethical Aspects of Decision Making in Humans and in Artificial Intelligence Vol. 2 Int Institute of Advanced Studies in Systems Research and Cybernetics 2003; 12Google Scholar.

52. Muehlhauser, L, Helm, L. ‘The singularity and machine ethics.’ In Eden, A, et al (eds). Singularity Hypotheses: A Scientific and Philosophical Assessment, Berlin: Springer 2012; 101–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53. As discussed at length in Lawrence, DR, Palacios-González, C, Harris, J. Artificial intelligence: the shylock syndrome.’ Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics 2016;25(2): 250–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

54. The authors acknowledge that these titles are somewhat cherry-picked for effect. However, the sheer ease of finding such articles is telling, even if they are interspersed with more positive portrayals; all were within one click of a simple Google News search for ‘Artificial intelligence.’

55. Thompson C, The real problem with artificial intelligence. (Business Insider Sept 10, 2015); available at: http://uk.businessinsider.com/autonomous-artificial-intelligence-is-the-real-threat-2015-9?r=US&IR=T (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

56. Huston, D. Why you should fear artificial intelligence (Techcrunch March 22, 2016); available at: https://techcrunch.com/2016/03/22/why-you-should-fear-artificial-intelligence (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

57. Adams, T. Nick Bostrom: We’re like small children playing with a bomb. (The Guardian June 12, 2016); available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jun/12/nick-bostrom-artificial-intelligence-machine. (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

58. Artificial intelligence to take over half of all jobs in next decade (RT International April 28, 2017); available at: https://www.rt.com/business/386452-ae-replace-half-jobs-technologist/. (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

59. Best, S. Has Humanity already lost control of artificial intelligence? (Mail Online April 11, 2017); available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4401836/Has-humanity-lost-control-artificial-intelligence.html. (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

60. Rawlinson, K. Microsoft’s Bill Gates insists ai is a threat. (BBC News January 29, 2015); available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/31047780. (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

61. Cellan–Jones R. Stephen Hawking warns artificial intelligence could end mankind. (BBC News December 2, 2014); available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-30290540 (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

62. Rodgers P. Elon Musk warns of terminator tech. (Forbes August 5, 2014); available at: http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulrodgers/2014/08/05/elon-musk-warns-ais-could-exterminate-humanity/ (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

63. For expansion see, among others, Harris, J and Lawrence, DR, New technologies, old attitudes, and legislative rigidity in Brownsword, R, Scotford, E, Yeung, K (eds), Oxford Handbook on the Law and Regulation of Technology Oxford University Press 2016Google Scholar.

64. BBC. Jennifer Doudna, The Life Scientific (BBC Radio 4, September 19, 2017) Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0952pgy#play (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

65. Taylor, C. The Concept of a Person. Philosophical Papers, Volume 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1985 at 97Google Scholar.

66. ibid.

67. A number of domestic and international documents of rights provide these protections, and may well be applicable here to form the basis of any legal policymaking addressing this issue.

68. Most notable successes include Cecilia: Expte. Nro. P-72.254/15 Presentación Efectuada Por A.F.A.D.A Respecto Del Chimpancé “Cecilia”- Sujeto No Humano (2016); Expte. A2174-2015/0 Asociacion de funcionarios y abogados por los derechos de los animales y otros contra gcba sobre amparo (2016); and Sandra: Asociacion de Funcionarios y Abogados por los Derechos de Los Animales y Otros Contra GCBA Sobre Amparo EXPTE A2174-2015/0; see also: ‘Orangutan granted controlled freedom by argentine court.’ (CNN. 2016); available at: http://edition.cnn.com/2014/12/23/world/americas/feat-orangutan-rights-ruling/ (last accessed 27 Nov 2019) Notable failures include: THE NONHUMAN RIGHTS PROJECT, INC., On Behalf Of TOMMY, V PATRICK C. LAVERY. 518336, State of New York Supreme Court 2014 (http://decisions.courts.state.ny.us/ad3/Decisions/2014/518336.pdf); MATTER OF NONHUMAN RIGHTS PROJECT, INC. V. Stanley. N.Y. Slip Op 31419, State of New York Supreme Court 2015 (http://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/other-courts/2015/2015-ny-slip-op-25257.html); see also: McKinley J. ‘Judge orders stony brook university to defend its custody of 2 chimps.’ (Nytimes.com. 2015). http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/22/nyregion/judge-orders-hearing-for-2-chimps-said-to-be-unlawfully-detained.html. (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

69. This argument follows a case built in Lawrence, DR. Amplio, Ergo Sum. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. 2018;27(4):686–97CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

70. It also follows that both they and we would have the right to defend ourselves from the other if such a conflict did come to pass.

71. See UK corporate governance code (Financial Reporting Council, 2018); available at: https://www.frc.org.uk/directors/corporate-governance-and-stewardship/uk-corporate-governance-code (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

72. See Companies Act 2006 s.171–177.

73. Companies Act 2006 s.172.

74. Companies Act 2006 s.170(1).

75. Companies Act 2006 s.260 (A derivative claim is a claim brought by one or more shareholders, but “on behalf of the company.” It is used to enforce breaches of directors’ duty owed to the company. If the director is found liable, the remedy against them will be awarded to the company, not to the shareholder bringing the claim).

76. Under Companies Act 2006 s.261 claimant shareholders must, immediately upon commencing the claim, apply to the court for permission to continue it this court permission is often difficult to obtain. See Reisberg, A, Derivative claims under the companies act 2006: much ado about nothing? In Armour, J, Payne, J (eds), Rationality in Company Law: Essays in Honour of D D Prentice Hart Publishing, 2008Google ScholarDignam A, Lowry. Company Law 9th ed, Oxford University Press 2016: 205; see also Keay AR, Loughrey JM, Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed: An Analysis of the New Derivative Action Under the Companies Act 2006 The Law Quarterly Review 2008: 124; 469; Loughrey JM, Keay AR, An Assessment Of The Present State Of Statutory Derivative Proceedings in Loughrey JM (ed.) Directors’ Duties and Shareholder Litigation in the Wake of the Financial Crisis. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2012: 187; Milman D, Shareholder Litigation In The UK: The Implications Of Recent Authorities And Other Developments Company Law Newsletter 2013; 1: 342.

77. Human Tissue Act 2004 Part 1.

78. ibid.

79. Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 2008 4A(1)(a).

80. ibid 4A.

81. Partridge, E et al, An extra-uterine system to physiologically support the extreme premature lamb Nature Communications 2017 8: 15112CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

82. Genetically Modified Organisms (Contained Use) Regulations 2014 Part 1, Para 2(1).

83. ibid.

84. ibid Schedule 2, Part 3, Para 4(a).

85. See ibid Part 3.

86. As was the case with both Mitochondrial Replacement Therapy being first performed in Mexico due to a (mistaken) belief that there were a lack of regulations (Palacios-González C, Medina-Arellano M, Mitochondrial Replacement Techniques And Mexico’s Rule Of Law: On The Legality Of The First Maternal Spindle Transfer Case Journal of Law and the Biosciences 2017; 4:50); as well as the first human germline gene editing being undertaken in China (Liang, P, Xu, Y, Zhang, X, Ding, C, Huang, R, Zhang, Z, et al. CRISPR/Cas9-mediated gene editing in human tripronuclear zygotes. Protein & cell. 2015 1;6(5):363-72.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed) before licenses were approved for the Crick Institute in the UK (Cressey D, Abbott A and Ledford H, UK scientists apply for licence to edit genes in human embryos (Nature News, 18 September 2015); available at: www.nature.com/news/uk-scientists-apply-for-licence-to-edit-genes-in-human-embryos-1.18394 (last accessed 27 Nov 2019)).

87. State of Wisconsin v Eric Loomis 2016 881 N.W.2d 749 (Wis. 2016)

see also Caliskan, A, Bryson, JJ, Narayanan, A. Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases. Science 2017 356(6334):183CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; and Israni E, Opinion: when an algorithm helps send you to prison (Nytimes.com October 26, 2017); available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/26/opinion/algorithm-compas-sentencing-bias.html (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

88. ACM Code of ethics and professional conduct (Association for Computing Machinery, 2018); available at: https://www.acm.org/about-acm/acm-code-of-ethics-and-professional-conduct (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

89. IEEE Code of ethics (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, 2018); available at: https://www.ieee.org/about/corporate/governance/p7-8.html (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

90. House of Commons, Robotics and artificial intelligence: government response to the committee’s fifth report of session 2016–17 (HC 896) (2017).

91. Artificial intelligence committee (UK Parliament, 2018); available at: https://www.parliament.uk/ai-committee (last accessed 27 Nov 2019).

92. House of Lords (2018) AI in the UK: ready, willing and able? HL 2017-2019 (100) paras 315,379.

93. Forty-two countries adopt new OECD Principles on Artificial Intelligence (Oecd.org. 2019); available at: https://www.oecd.org/science/forty-two-countries-adopt-new-oecd-principles-on-artificial-intelligence.html (last accessed 30 Nov 2019).

94. Focus on responsible AI: a new Council of Europe study draws attention to the responsibility challenges linked to the use of artificial intelligence (Council of Europe. 2019); available at: https://www.coe.int/en/web/freedom-expression/-/focus-on-responsible-ai-a-new-council-of-europe-study-draws-attention-to-the-responsibility-challenges-linked-to-the-use-of-artificial-intelligence (last accessed 30 Nov 2019).