Don't always work in all scenarios, was the takeaway.
There's a metric ton of salt to be taken with the mental concepts and possible interpretations of such "laws".
Largely, they do work in the stories, despite the inherent ambiguity.
> There does not exist a set of rules that make a completely safe and useful robot.
That was not demonstrated. We have safe and useful robots, for some values of 'safe' and 'useful', today. Again, most of the robots in the stories are not thrown (or planned to be thrown) in the metaphorical trash heap.
It’s a bit hard to write a story about the impacts of robots in society without a society with robots. There is also an entire series based around a world where the robots tried to rise up against humans.
> That was not demonstrated.
No, that was my summary of his point. It is not perfect, but I think it’s accurate enough. I can assure you, that none of today’s robots are completely safe. They will be just as happy to move wherever you tell them regardless of what is in the way. When I said “completely safe” I mean it in the way that the three laws are written, incapable of harm. I am not arguing that robots are not useful, but his point was about a perfect safety system. It doesn’t exist.