Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 19 submissions in the queue.
posted by n1 on Thursday May 15 2014, @04:22AM   Printer-friendly
from the t800-confirmed-to-be-attending dept.

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This discussion has been archived.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.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Thursday May 15 2014, @05:58PM

    by frojack (1554) on Thursday May 15 2014, @05:58PM (#43834) Journal

    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.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1) by hoochiecoochieman on Thursday May 15 2014, @06:20PM

    by hoochiecoochieman (4158) on Thursday May 15 2014, @06:20PM (#43849)

    Oddball exception simply proves the rule.

    It's not oddball, according to news I've read, it's quite common (and deadly).

    Land-minds don't hunt you down and follow you home.

    I usually don't fear land-minds, because earthworms have very little brains and are very slow to follow me, anyway.

    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.

    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".