Which of these is NOT one of the original laws of robotics?

• A. A robot may be used in combat as long as it obeys the human being who is giving orders
• B. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with causing harm to a human being or obeying orders given by human beings
• C. A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders would cause harm to a human being
• D. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm

Answer: (A)

Robots are guided by a strict order of safety that puts human well-being first. The first rule says a robot may not injure a human or allow a human to come to harm, even by not acting. The second rule requires following human orders unless doing so would violate the first rule. The third rule says the robot should protect its own existence as long as that protection doesn’t conflict with the first or second rule. The statement about using a robot in combat simply by obeying orders isn’t part of these original rules; it could enable harming people if the orders require it, which would break the first rule, and there’s no separate combat allowance in the original set. So that option isn’t one of the original laws, while the others align with the established rules.