ATTENTION SPOILERS!!!

No doubt, influence of Isaac Asimov and "I, Robot" in particular to the sci-fi genre is huge.
The three rules, defined in this book literally formed the basis for describing AI and robot in sci-fi literature and has been referenced thousand times by different authors.
"I, Robot" is definitely one of the gems of the genre and it's "must read" for everyone interested in science fiction and robotics.
But with all said, there are still some inconsistencies that I noticed.
The first thing that drags attention and makes you say "Whaaat?" is how robots from the novel are described as black boxes. No one knows what's going on inside their mind and all they can do is assumptions from investigation of their behavior. Whereas it should be possible to interfere with their thinking process by altering this "positronic field". Because it's program after all. There is some code, controlling the behavior of these robots, and it should be possible to alter this code, change some lines, make robot do whatever you want. I understand that it's AI and made to be autonomous, but anyway, it'd be stupid not to leave some backdoors to control them in the case of emergency. I mean they are made by human for human, right? Think of our current driverless cars; We can switch down the autopilot and take manual control at any moment.
Another manifestation of the same issue is how they communicate with robots. It's verbal only! We see some moments where doctor Calvin chooses words and expressions to talk to a brain in order to keep it from paradox and malfunction. That's not how robots work in real. Of course, verbal communication is more fancy and user friendly but in such scientific projects like development of hyper-drive, there should be more advanced ways of communicating (like through a console by writing a code).
The part where the Brain builds a space ship with hyperdrive was ridiculous. I mean, it couldn't have been built only by robots. Where were all the building materials and supplies coming from? Why no one knows the principles of how this hyperdrive works? Even after it's been built. It's like they didn't care about how it's gonna be working, they were just waiting there until the thing will be ready. Doesn't seem much scientific, does it?
Second thing that make the book less believable is the world politics and economy. World divided to global regions, governed by Coordinators. We can find it at pretty much every sci-fi book about future. But we see that the real world gets more divided and separated, number of military conflicts are at the same level as 50 years ago. World economy at the book is controlled by so called Machines which define the economical plan for production of all the goods. That's some communist economy that didn't prove itself and I don't thing companies like "U.S. Robots.." could exist at such economical conditions.
I believe, these are things that we can notice only from current point of development of the world, technology and AI systems and it was impossible for Isaac Asimov to foresee all that at 1950.
But anyway, it's fun reading and author touches upon lots of important issues about development of AI, robotics ethics etc.
I rate it 4 stars from 5. ( )

Leído y releído muchas veces. ( )

A good classic Sci-fi that holds up over time. It has been decades since I read the Foundation series. Asimov is still a master. ( )

Interesting book: The plot sucks outright, but the prose and stories are quite good. Essentially, the book is a collection of short stories, most of which are sequential, but all of which are strung together by an interview. Then it ends.
So, no, I will not be reading the rest of the series. Note: I did read the final book "Robots of Dawn" because I found it in the house. It was much worse. ( )

A great read, I really enjoyed. Gets you thinking about here we're heading, especially when you think when it was written. ( )