Should we impose restrictions on the appearance of humanoid robots? For example, should it be forbidden to manufacture them in the likeness of specific individuals?

Okay, regarding this question, let's talk about my thoughts.

Humanoid Robots' "Faces": Should We Set Limits?

This is a particularly interesting topic because it's not just a technical issue; it's also about ourselves, society, and ethics. Just like in the movies, when a robot looks exactly like a real person, various troubles and considerations immediately follow.

I believe that the question of "whether or not to restrict robot appearance" cannot be answered with a simple "yes" or "no"; it depends on the situation. We can analyze it from several levels.

Why "Hit the Brakes"? Reasons for Supporting Restrictions

1. Protecting Personal Portrait Rights and Identity Security This is the most direct and easily understood point. Imagine if someone created a robot that looked exactly like you, using your face and your voice to do things, or even commit misdeeds. The consequences would be unimaginable. Your reputation could be damaged, and your family and friends might be deceived. Therefore, prohibiting the creation of robots with the likeness of specific living individuals without their permission should be a red line. This is similar to not allowing the unauthorized use of someone else's photos, but the problems posed by robots are far more serious.

2. Avoiding Emotional Manipulation and Psychological Dependence If someone, out of grief for a deceased loved one, created an identical robot to accompany them, it might sound heartwarming, but it's deeply unsettling upon reflection. Could this lead people to dwell on the past, preventing them from truly moving on? Could such a "substitute" distort our views on life, death, and memory? This is a dangerous emotional shortcut that could lead to deeper psychological problems.

3. Maintaining the Social Trust System If our surroundings begin to feature a large number of robots indistinguishable from real people, the sense of trust between individuals will significantly decrease. In a meeting, is the person across from you real or a robot? When you ask for directions on the street, is the person a helpful citizen or a program? When "seeing is believing" becomes unreliable, the entire foundation of social trust will be shaken.

Why "Ease Off the Gas"? Reasons Against Blanket Prohibitions

1. Positive Role in Specific Fields In certain specific scenarios, "customized faces" can be valuable. For example:

   • Medical Rehabilitation: Creating a robot with a specific appearance (e.g., a therapist) for autistic children or patients with social anxiety to simulate social training.
   • Education and Entertainment: In a museum, wouldn't an Einstein-like robot explaining relativity be much more engaging than reading a book? Or interacting with movie character robots in a theme park.
   • Film Industry: Customizing robot doubles for actors to perform dangerous stunts.

2. Freedom of Creation and Art Robots themselves are also a medium for industrial design and artistic creation. Completely prohibiting them from having "human faces" might stifle many possibilities for innovation. The key is not what it looks like, but how it is used.

3. Laws Can Catch Up, Rather Than Imposing a Complete Ban Technological development always outpaces legislation. Our strategy should not be to throw the baby out with the bathwater by outright prohibiting things, but rather to quickly improve relevant laws and regulations. For instance, we could stipulate:

   • High-fidelity robots must have clear identifiers (e.g., a special mark) so people can immediately recognize they are not real humans.
   • Abusing robot appearances for fraud, defamation, or other illicit activities should incur severe legal penalties.

My View: Guiding Rather Than Blocking, The Key is "Degree"

Overall, I lean towards a compromise solution with clear rules.

• For living ordinary people: It must be absolutely prohibited. No one should be able to replicate your face without your consent. This is a fundamental human right.
• For public figures and historical figures: This could be conditionally open. For example, for educational, scientific research, or public welfare purposes, and requiring authorization from relevant institutions or their heirs. Commercial use would require stricter approval and regulation.
• For virtual or generic human faces: Innovation should be encouraged. Designers can create unique, non-existent human faces, which makes robots appear friendly without triggering the ethical risks mentioned above.

In summary, we don't need to completely close this door out of fear, but we also cannot let it develop unchecked without preparation. Equipping technology with "brakes" and a "steering wheel" so that it benefits society without crossing moral and legal boundaries is what we should be doing most.