4 ms·
It is an unequivocal war crime to create a computer program that autonomously kills humans.
by crmd 9y ago
It is an unequivocal war crime to create a computer program that autonomously kills humans.
- nine_k 9y agoHow about autonomous guided weapons? A cruise missile, having been given a target, autonomously chooses the optimal path to it. The level of autonomy of this kind will only grow. A weapon that may elect to kill a particular human but not another looks to me like an improvement over a weapon that just kills everyone around, as a typical bomb does.
- crmd 9y ago>having been given a target Not a war crime
- sogen 9y agosome scoff media about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prey_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prey_(novel) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hated_in_the_Nation_(Black_Mirror) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hated_in_the_Nation_(Black_Mir...
- randcraw 9y agoI think the point is, only a human should: 1) authorize the kill, 2) choose the target, and 3) specify the limit of acceptable collateral damage. The missile's AI should never decide 1, 2, or 3, but only how to execute its orders in compliance with the standing rules of engagement.
- kozikow 9y agoIt's hard to find an appropriate definition. What if AI is there theoretically only to provide suggestions to a human operator, but in practice, the operator gets so used to AI's predictions that he always goes with the AI's suggestion.
- cbanek 9y agoWhat if it's a defensive weapon. Like the "Doomsday Machine" from Strangelove? Or possibly even reality? (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113242681 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1132426...)
- mythrwy 9y agoInstinctively I tend to agree. But is it a war crime to place land mines? What if the computer program performed essentially the same function as a land mine but was more discriminating leading to less innocent casualties?
- archontes 9y agoEvery civilized person in the world might be decrying it, but all of that is no matter. It is a simple calculation of expected value of outcome. If the payoff is large enough, it'll be done. Let's assume that if a country goes public with its development of autonomous weaponry, every other country in the world turns on that country. Let us also assume that it creates an asymmetric warfare state such that said nation can successfully win a war against every other nation, provided the autonomous weaponry is sufficiently well developed. This provides a simple calculus. If the development can be done in time to win the war, it will be done, and thus we can also adjust the variables: if not every country turns on the developer nation, then development time doesn't have to be as short in order to successfully get the product over the line. The reality is that it'll just look like NK's bid for atomic weapons. Bitching and sanctions until development is complete. Edit: The way to cut this particular Gordian knot is to view the development itself as tantamount to execution. Development of autonomous weapons needs to be recognized as literal war and murder, and those doing the development, from leaders to corporations to scientists, need to be caught, tried, convicted, and sentenced as if they were successful.
- angersock 9y agoWhy is it a war crime? If robots can kill humans more humanely than other humans, and cause less maiming injuries, what is the problem? (I can think of one, but let's see what you come up with.)