Lots of readers are making this point:

Jonah — Did I miss something? Why isn’t this all settled by adhering to Isaac Asimov’s “Three Laws of Robotics,” published in the 1942? There are: 1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. 2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. 3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law. Through his life Asimov defended the Laws well. I’m not certain that anyone has found a serious fault with them.

Me: Well, if you read the article, the South Koreans aren’t trying to figure out rules for how robots behave but for how humans should treat robots. I have no problem with Asimov’s laws, my objection is with laws telling me how to treat my non-sentient robots. They can have my robot when they pry it from my cold dead hands. And if my robot complains about how cold my hands are, well, then it’s gonna get a beating.*

*Note: If you haven’t guessed already, I’m trying to bait silly people into being disturbed by my cavalierly cruel attitude to our robot brethren.