should self learning robots be created

Thank you con for your arguments. "well well in the suicide case of robot the owner said that he would never buy a robot again what does that really mean? it means that the robot created a fear among the humans if such robots are used at wide range wont it be harmful" No, most likely Roomba's won't cause widespread panic as a result of a few malfunctions. The accident that caused the owner's home to be heavily damaged was a result of the owner's negligence. A pot should not be left burning on a stove while the owner isn't home. The owner is scapegoating a machine instead of accepting responsibility. "2)As more computers, machines, and robots become self learning, more applications for the technology will become available. This technology has the potential to do some great things can you please tell me what is the great thing if all this will be done by robots then why there will be need of humans to think so no need of scientist as you suggests" At this stage and in any stage of robot evolution proved likely to happen (based on previous arguments) machines will help free up the minds of great thinkers to focus on less tedious things. Machines are good at specializing, while human minds are capable of creativity, looking at several different things and jumping from one field of study to another. These strengths are likely to compliment each other. "3)robots can be very dangerous in surgery following link supports my argument" These surgery robots aren't really robots. They don't think and they have no autonomous function. The robot is completely controlled by a human[1]. These surgeries are actually safer in the hands of a well trained surgeon[2]. The key is to make sure the surgeons are more competent before allowing them to use this technology. It would be much better to create some sort of certification process then eliminate this type of surgery altogether. [1] http://www.roboticurologicsurgery.com... [2] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... The information in source 2 may be accessed easier here http://en.m.wikipedia.org... "4) i strongly believe robots can cause unemployment by reading the following article" These people are making predictions about the world in the year 2100. These "experts" can't know what new industries will exist, what old ones will be replaced. These educated guesses are still likely to be way off the mark. Here is a few predictions made in 1950 about the year 2000 by "experts". 1. Women will mostly be 6ft tall, muscular, wear size 11 shoes and will compete with men in most proffesional sports. 2. Technology will make a 25 hour work week standard. 3. Combination automobile planes will be perfected. 4. Radio broadcasting will have disappeared. As you can see predictions about the future aren't reliable. "5)suppose a drone is made to kill a terrorist by recognizing its certain features and that drone finds it in a crowded place what will it do think of other people around or execute its order, it is highly dangerous to make such robots in human life and i think they should not be allowed to be made as self intelligent" If it's not advanced enough to make that discernment then it won't be used without giving humans a direct over-ride. This is actually an argument for self learning robots. If they can be put in danger rather then humans, then countless lives will be saved. My arguments have for the most part gone unrefuted. I urge my opponent to show the dangers of self learning robots specifically and to address my arguments. I know the last round is traditionally not for new arguments. I urge my opponent to ignore this tradition and to give his strongest arguments showing the dangers of self learning robots in no way is justified by the benefits.