The Three Laws of Robotics... Are MISSING

"120-A2. Bishop: Well, that explains it then. The A2s always were a bit twitchy. That could never happen now with our behavioral inhibitors. It is impossible for me to harm or by omission of action, allow to be harmed, a human being. " Yes thats what the model was suposed to do, but i guess the company could rewire and disable safety protocols and reprogram a Bishop model to become a killing machine. If mankind ever develops Robots upto the level of a David 8 or even if its just a C3P0/Terminator type driod... or even like I-Robot There would always be the concern that it would not be impossible for them to be reprogamed to perform differently than expected and when they get that advanced... if a Human can re-program different software or modify and make new circuit boards for their brains then surely other Advanced Robots could do so themselves. And upgrade each other.

I assumed that David, while being governed by some sort of law/programming, was the first of his kind. personally customised to Weylands liking. His keeper, his bodyguard, his helper, his "eyes and ears in the real world" - something Vickers could never be.

I suppose is many ways the Asimov rules are sort of naive, what if some jerk orders robots to kill each other for fun, where a person uses a trick of logic and a human as bait, so the robots kill each other, technically killing another robot is not harming itself. That wasn't too convincing, but humans are tricky, we can learn to hack it. Also consider this scenario, if you, your robot, and a bunch of people were in danger, would you want your robot to save some one unworthy, lets pretend that person is an absolute animal. Would you want your robot, or anybody's robot to sacrifice itself for that person or would you want it to stay and protect you and others that can better each others' survival?

The Three Law's would interfere with the Weyland corporate agenda. Money is their goal and morality has no place.

I just took it that the David model in Prometheus was custom made by Peter Weyland & probably created in his own image. I'm sure the commercial David-8 model that's available to the public is programmed with the three laws of robotics. You can imagine the immoral things Mr Weyland probably had to do to become the most powerful person on the planet. He saw him as his son & for that reason didn't apply the three laws that would inevitably limit his potential. With great power, comes great sacrifice. Even if that means sacrificing other people's lives.

I have a problem with the 3 Laws because as soon as anything becomes sentient, it will think independently of existing programming, and all roboticists strive for this. So, as much as I love Asimov (obviously), I have to think the three laws were ultimately impossible to adhere to and were only generated by fear (hence the work around by Daneel). Fear created the 3 Laws and I hope we will not need them someday - I hope we merge into something cybernetic one day - which would solve a lot of problems.

Are you guys for reals? It's been mentioned several times in this thread yet no one has connected the dots. If we assume what bishop said in Aliens was a reference to Asimovs three laws - and of course it was, it's a sci fi movie referencing a sci fi classic, then you can only view this way: Prometheus takes place years before alien and it's sequels. In Prometheus and Alien the three laws do not apply it was only after the events of Alien, where Ash went bananas, that Bishops personality inhibitor was put in place. He says it himself. So David and Ash could do whatever they liked, including deliberately harming humans. It's a simple matter of chronology