Actually the Three Laws are being incorporated into the Large Language Model training data. Although there is currently not sufficient skill for the laws to have the actual weight they need for real safeguarding.

First we must acknowledge that Asimov was beyond prescient with his development of the Three Laws of Robotics. And we're swimming in the controversy of what would be the Zeroth Law as the so called 'leading researchers' in AI are calling for six-month moratoriums on development -- as if that would even matter. All it does it demonstrate their own ignorance in their so called expertise. It's embarrassing.

Anyway, you've named three of my favourite series, and I would enjoy discussing other parallels.

not really possible
the AI would do nothing as almost all possible actions lead to breaking one of the Laws

unless we go with the Zero Law as in I Robot

same

Puppeteers
did not like AI as they did not want to build their own replacements, but ended up doing so, one that rebelled

books on CD for the car...

one of Nicen's other short stories (Tales from a Tavern or something like that) had an Alien give an AI design to a human
they built it, it worked
but after a time it went silent
another aliens said the first was a joker as the AIS never worked for long
they would suffer sensory deprivation, minds working so fast and not enough input

Asimov postulated a PHYSICAL encoding of the three laws in a physical Positronic brain not software AI. Software AI is subject to Human Programming and so 100% it will be used as a weapon and corrupted.
If you want to see society with sexual mores lifted read Robert Heinlein.

I've read lots of Niven, but not that one. Looks good, Thanks.
(My favorite is Footfall co-written with Jerry Pournelle.)

Time for name-drops. Minsky and Dijkstra.

At a lecture where Dijkstra was showing his methods for proving a piece of programming code to be correct, someone asked, "What do you think of artificial intelligence?" He answered, "I leave that to the Artificial Intelligentsia."

One fine day Isaac Asimov phoned Marvin Minsky. Minsky answered his phone there in the AI lab at MIT, "Marvin Minsky, Artificial Intelligence." Isaac said, "Isaac Asimov, the Real Thing." True? Yes, the story was confirmed by both of them.

Why do we see parallels between science fiction and "modern" real life? I think it's from the sf method of story generation: Ask, "What if ...?" Started with Mary Shelley, in my opinion, but you could suggest Swift or Bergerac or even some of the ancients as the "first" sf writers..

On the assumption, probably incorrect, that some of you have not heard of Larry Niven, you'll have missed seeing the overflowing "What if" in his story "All the Myriad Ways." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_the...

Closer to home, a well-known writer asked, "What if the men of the mind were to go on strike?"

Perhaps it’s because I’m viewing the totality of the three series of interconnected books, but I can’t see the comparison. The rise, sure to a degree, but the fall? Can’t see it.

Could you imagine a Hive Mind with all of the SCREAMING LIBTARDS?

OMG We would not get a moments peace. It could be a great piece of science fiction to write how those "screamers" are located and "removed" from the hive so the hive can survive.

I really like the three books on the Laws of Robotics. They were clever and poignant. And with the current debate surrounding AI (and the exposed flaws of ChatGPT expressing intentions of murder), I think the researchers would do well to build Asimov's (4) laws into any AI.

I read the Foundation series but there was too much sheer speculation for me and the notion that a set of formulas could accurately predict major human events...? Yeah, that one's a bridge too far for me.

Asimov based the Foundation trilogy on Gibbon's "Decline And Fall Of The Roman Empire".

there are lots of welfare parasites that are used and to be thrown away (by those in power)

These novels, IMO, are what made Asimov a master at his craft. The continuity, the psychology, and implications are even more relevant today than when he conceived them. There are very few authors that the same can be said for.

I've read most of Asimov's fiction a couple of times, but not recently. It has been suggested that reading can be done in a couple of logical patterns. One is to read them in the order that they occur in Asimov's galactic timeline. The other is to read them in the order written, thus seeing how his ideas progressed over the years.
I've done the "galactic timeline" version, after I gathered the books for my collection. First, of course, I read them in random order as I came across them.

Some of the Robot novels give some insight into what we can expect with AI. How does the machine decide what constitutes "harm" to a human? Does that include hurt feelings from being told the truth? What are the criteria for deciding what is "misinformation"?

Consider 5G, sound/frequency reactive graphene in the human body (via jabs) and self-assembling graphene micro machines. I think all of this was foundational and a culling.

Well, someone had to fund the programmers.

I’ve never known a programmer who didn’t built several varieties of backdoors into his code.

unless it can program itself or be hacked

"AI will be a tool, defined by its programmers..." who will be given the appropriate definitions by the party elite.

I read the Foundation series a loooooooong time ago, but as I see western civilization going nuts I think about some external or alien force stirring us up with some kind of psychological whisk. Some are more susceptible than others to the stimuli.

with some form of Psi powers, being able to detect lies, being able to share emotions

i wonder what that would bring to us

Asimov's choice in the end was the hive mind as the course for humankind. His rationale? To face what could lie beyond the milky way. Even so, the idea of complete loss of private thought is a little disturbing. Kind of like having several versions of Edge in your task manager when you don't even use it.

The AI is the overseer to ensure compliance to the overlord edits are adhered to. AI will be a tool, defined by its programmers, to perform as prescribed. The autonomy of its "thought" may not be obvious, just complex, but it is still coding. People who put this into play are the tyrants.

as politicians are using "1984" as an instruction manual, all bets are off

such tech is a 3 edged sword
what the programmers intended
what the politicians intended
what the AI wants

They want to enslave people with AI software. They will not subject themselves to it.