The 'robot rights' debate, and its related question of 'robot responsibility', invokes some of the most polarized positions in AI ethics. While some advocate for granting robots rights on a par with human beings, others, in a stark opposition argue that robots are not deserving of rights but are objects that should be our slaves. Grounded in post-Cartesian philosophical foundations, we argue not just to deny robots 'rights', but to deny that robots, as artifacts emerging out of and mediating human being, are the kinds of things that could be granted rights in the first place. Once we see robots as mediators of human being, we can understand how the `robots rights' debate is focused on first world problems, at the expense of urgent ethical concerns, such as machine bias, machine elicited human labour exploitation, and erosion of privacy all impacting society's least privileged individuals. We conclude that, if human being is our starting point and human welfare is the primary concern, the negative impacts emerging from machinic systems, as well as the lack of taking responsibility by people designing, selling and deploying such machines, remains the most pressing ethical discussion in AI.

中文翻译：

---

机器人权利？让我们来谈谈人类福利吧

“机器人权利”辩论及其相关的“机器人责任”问题引发了人工智能伦理学中一些最两极分化的立场。有些人主张授予机器人与人类同等的权利，而另一些人则坚决反对，认为机器人不值得拥有权利，而应该成为我们的奴隶。基于后笛卡尔哲学基础，我们认为不仅要否认机器人的“权利”，而且要否认机器人作为从人类中出现并作为人类中介的人工制品，首先是可以被授予权利的东西。一旦我们将机器人视为人类的中介，我们就可以理解“机器人权利”的辩论是如何集中在第一世界问题上，而忽视紧迫的伦理问题，例如机器偏见、机器引发的人类劳动剥削、和隐私的侵蚀都影响到社会中最没有特权的人。我们得出的结论是，如果人类是我们的起点，人类福利是首要关注点，那么机械系统产生的负面影响，以及人们设计、销售和部署此类机器缺乏责任感，仍然是最紧迫的道德问题。 AI 中的讨论。