5 ms·

America would have to become a drastically worse place for any law enforcement agency to deploy an autonomous lethal force that had less than 100% identificatio

• int_19h 8y ago
  It already deploys a manned lethal force with far less than 100% identification accuracy, so what's the fundamental difference? The arguments in courts would be the same - "an honest mistake", "incident due to unfortunate circumstances" etc, wrapped up with a claim that if such broad latitude to make "mistakes" is not given, then society will descend into lawless anarchy. But it would be applied to people who deploy the robots, instead of the people pulling the trigger. Alternatively, and more likely, measures would be taken to make it not autonomous on paper, e.g. requiring a human operator to approve any action the robot is intending to take. In practice, this would likely be one of those "moral crumple zones" with little practical meaning.
• Mirioron 8y ago
  I think several decades from now I'd take the Boston dynamics robot walking in rather than a police officer, because the robot won't have to fear for its life, so it's less likely to use lethal force.
• anonytrary 8y ago
  They'll probably never hit 100% accuracy. But, for example, if 5,000 ids are required everyday, then an accuracy of 99.999999% would be probably good enough for a hundred year period.