If we can make artificial intelligent machines that act more human it raises the question of what sort of emotions we'd like them to express.
There is much debate on the ethics of artificial intelligence machines that are designed to kill. But who's responsible when a non-lethal AI system causes damage, harm or even death?
Some have argued we should not ban but embrace offensive autonomous weapons, or 'killer robots'. But the arguments against a ban are weak.
Hey robot sports fans, here's the inside story on how UNSW won the world championship in robot soccer last week.
Why obsess about killer robots of the future, when all the parts are already here, and already in use?
If military robots are inevitable, then AI and robotics researchers should work to make them ethical, not retreat by calling for an ineffectual ban.
Humans are no longer the only judges of creativity. Computers can perform the same task – and may even be more objective.
The thousands of people who signed an open letter calling for a ban on autonomous killer weapons and robots are misguided. We already have such killing machines and we should embrace them.
We need to ban offensive autonomous weapons - or 'killer robots' - before a new arms race to produce them begins.
The competitors of the robot world cup are creeping closer to the goal of a robotic team that can beat the best human players.
Google's image recognition project has not only generated some disturbing images but also tells us something about how we humans identify objects we see.
The rise of robots poses awkward legal questions that we'd be best off tackling sooner rather than later.
Is the rise of the robots on the horizon? Not while closed doors, stairs, and uneven floors still pose a problem.
The Chinese search engine Baidu was found to have cheated in a computer science competition.
Voice recognition technology is getting better at understanding what we are saying, even if we only say part of what we mean. So how does it work?
Why would our software turn against us when without us it's useless?
The more we automate jobs, the more we need to find new jobs for people, especially if the government wants us to stay in the workforce longer. That's going to take some clever thinking.
Some economists and others have argued smart machines are increasingly stealing our jobs. In fact, the opposite may be true.
More STEM education isn't a bad thing, but if we want to safeguard our jobs from being taken by machines, we need more emphasis on the humanities.
Artificial intelligence is the future, but are computers ready to take a seat at the board?