4 ms·
If war can be waged without loss of life the biggest incentive to avoid war is gone. We have seen countries start attacking each other on the internet in peace
by slackingoff2017 9y ago
If war can be waged without loss of life the biggest incentive to avoid war is gone.
We have seen countries start attacking each other on the internet in peace time because it's hard to prove and the costs are abstract. I fear the same will be true for war with robots.
- cbanek 9y agoI totally agree, but I sadly think we're already there. Part of the magic behind using remote controlled drones is that we can attack people far away without putting American lives at risk. If we actually had to go there and risk casualties, it probably wouldn't be worth it. But if it's just some innocent by-standards that don't happen to be American, that doesn't seem to stop us.
- AliAdams 9y agoI think GP's point was more focused on the threat of allowing a small number of people (or an individual) to do a large amount of harm.
- abhi3 9y ago>If war can be waged without loss of life the biggest incentive to avoid war is gone. There will be a loss of life in any war. Note that they are called 'Killer' robots. It's just that the loss of life will be of noncombatants. My concern is not countries waging wars against each other because that can always be deterred, but instead governments using it on its own people. Right now authoritarian governments need to worry about soldiers rebelling but computer code powering the robots isn't gonna rebel when you ask it to kill a city square full of protesters.