The article specifically calls out the word "harm" in the three laws as a source of ambiguity. This, as the author also points out, becomes a source of conflict in the I, Robot stories.
The author is making a joke using the "considered harmful" trope/meme in conjunction with the assertion that the word "harm" is ambiguous, thereby rendering the phrase "considered harmful" relatively meaningless.
Unfortunately, this joke seems to be lost on many of the commenters here. Technically minded folks seem to see the phrase "considered harmful" and proceed to lose their minds. Never mind that the phrase, in my experience, is almost exclusively used in jest. But based on people's reactions to it, "considered harmful" in a title might as well be flame bait. In fact, I seem to remember a serious article a while back called "'Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful" that should have put this whole thing to bed.
I think you may have missed the joke. The article explicitly calls out the word "harm", as it's used in the three laws, as being a source of vagueness, which the article then goes on to say becomes fodder for some of the conflicts in the stories.
The author is making a joke using the "considered harmful" trope/meme in conjunction with the assertion that the word "harm" is ambiguous, thereby rendering the phrase "considered harmful" relatively meaningless.
Unfortunately, this joke seems to be lost on many of the commenters here. Technically minded folks seem to see the phrase "considered harmful" and proceed to lose their minds. Never mind that the phrase, in my experience, is almost exclusively used in jest. But based on people's reactions to it, "considered harmful" in a title might as well be flame bait. In fact, I seem to remember a serious article a while back called "'Considered Harmful' Considered Harmful" that should have put this whole thing to bed.