4 ms·
Even in a controlled testing environment, it would be difficult to distinguish the signature of an autonomous weapon system from a remote-controlled unmanned sy
by i_am_proteus 8y ago
Even in a controlled testing environment, it would be difficult to distinguish the signature of an autonomous weapon system from a remote-controlled unmanned system.
On the battlefield, it will be impossible.
The only difference between a system with a human firebreak and a fully autonomous weapon is the flip of a bit.
Treaties will not be effective at preventing the development of these weapons. Any illusions will be shattered by the first bad actor.
An arms race in this space is inevitable; realistically it has already begun.
- alkonaut 8y agoThat's true: you will have deniability. To begin with, all autonomous sysems will also be able to operate as remote controlled, or semi-autonomous with human triggering. If you are the kind of state that will, say, repaint military vehicles before sending them across the border to a country where you "have no military engagement" - you would also no doubt operate autonomous weapons and call them remote controlled. Still - using what amounts to a nuclear first strike is a dangerous game to play, so it might at least make superpowers think twice if it's made clear that this is how it's seen. Russia wouldn't try to use a bioweapon or tiny nuke and claim it was conventional, because it's a risky gamble.