SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The U.N. has begun discussion on "lethal autonomous robots," killing machines which take the next step from our current drones which are operator controlled, to completely autonomous killing machines.
"Killer robots would threaten the most fundamental of rights and principles in international law," warned Steve Goose, arms division director at Human Rights Watch.
Are we too far down the rabbit hole, or can we come to reasonable and humane limits on this new world of death-by-algorithm?
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
U.N. Starts Discussion on Lethal Autonomous Robots
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 27 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
To avoid criticism, do nothing, say nothing, be nothing.
-- Elbert Hubbard
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Thursday May 15 2014, @07:54AM
Yes it is! The Ottawa Treaty went into effect in 1999. Some notable rogue nations have refused to sign it, like North Korea, but still international law.
And what is the difference between a land mine and an autonomous targeting machine, anyway? Sure, the mine only decides to explode if someone steps on it, and the killer robot only decides to terminate if the detected object meets some pre-determined profile as determined by meta-data, like stepping on the killer robot.
As for asymmetry, yes, third world nations will never have the capability to produce such amazing instruments of death! Only advanced nations, or the machines, produced, by advanced nations, .. . . oh, shit! You have heard of "Little Big Horn"?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 15 2014, @02:15PM
A landmine doesn't move. As long as nobody was there who could have planed one, you can assume that a place which was safe before still is safe. An autonomous targeting machine may target you at a place which was safe before.
A land mine explodes only once, then it's dead. So if some unfortunate person steps on it, well, bad for him, but afterwards it's gone; other people can now safely walk to that place (e.g. to help in case the victim is not killed, but severely injured). An autonomous targeting machine will continue to target, so anyone helping the victim will also be in danger to be injured or killed.
A landmine only covers the place where it sits. Unless you step directly on it, it won't kill you. Autonomous robots cover a complete area. If you are anywhere in that area, you're at danger. It doesn't even help you if you don't move at all (unless the drone has been programmed to only shoot on moving targets).
The very local triggering of landmines especially means that if you know where it is, experts can easily get close to it, in order to disarm it. Disarming an autonomous killing robot won't be easy, even if you know exactly where it is.
(Score: 1) by hoochiecoochieman on Thursday May 15 2014, @02:49PM
That's wrong. Of course it does. [bbc.co.uk]
(Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday May 15 2014, @05:58PM
Oddball exception simply proves the rule.
Land-minds don't hunt you down and follow you home.
I can't believe this discussion is actually going on, and that anyone intelligent enough to post on SN can't understand the difference between a land mine and an autonomous attack drone [rt.com].
You don't have to imagine Terminator style walking robots. The current fleet of remotely operated unmanned drones in US, French, and British arsenals are one software upload away from this capability TODAY.
(US Air force General says 2047 [engadget.com] but that's just public PR. They are probably flying these software packages today that do everything but the actual shoot.
Today, the US always has a human (or two) [truenorthperspective.com] pulling the trigger at Creech [af.mil]. What they don't tell you is how many drones each pilot can manage. Its not one to one.
In the future these very same drones (or better ones) can be instructed to loiter over Kandahar province, track and attack anything moving in a certain direction in a specific valley. They can follow an individual to a house in the middle of a city, and fly a missile into the house without injuring the neighbor. Today there is always an operator making the decision (we think). That can't be guaranteed in the future.
It won't be as simplistic and obvious as See Tank, Shoot tank.
It will be more like fly to area, see any SUV or pickup follow it out of town and fire missile without regard to who might be in it, or see a group of men, follow them to house, fire missile, and fly home. No human in any part of that decision, other than the guy who pushes it out of the hanger doors.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 1) by hoochiecoochieman on Thursday May 15 2014, @06:20PM
It's not oddball, according to news I've read, it's quite common (and deadly).
I usually don't fear land-minds, because earthworms have very little brains and are very slow to follow me, anyway.
Please enlighten me: What discussion are you talking about, and where in my text I claimed that there's no "difference between a land mine and an autonomous attack drone".
(Score: 2) by tibman on Thursday May 15 2014, @06:09PM
There is a big difference between landmines and robots/drones. Landmines are placed where they cannot be seen and continue to operate for decades or longer (long after they are needed). Landmines are dangerous to remove and usually are just blown up instead. A drone could just fly or drive home.
You are right though, almost everyone has agreed that landmines are terrible and illegal. The US did not sign the treaty because they find landmines to be extremely effective. However they typically only have landmines with short expiration dates on them. Placed mines are temporary and self-destruct within days. Anti-vehicle mines can be permanent but i have never heard of their use lately. It's more than possible that the Korean DMZ is mined? But that is probably a perfect use of mines (until it is no longer needed).
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.