5 ms·

It’s a fair point. I suppose the distinction is whether the robot makes the decision to fire on its own.

• notatoad 4y ago
  that is not the issue in question here. SFPD wants to deploy remote-controlled weaponry - an officer would still be . IMHO it's a pretty fine disinction between a remote-operated gun and a gun that needs to be held by a human hand. (to be clear, i think police should have fewer guns regardless of how the trigger gets pulled)
  • tmptmpgo 4y ago
    That was kind of my point. When a “robot” with a gun controlled by a human, is it really fundamentally different from an efficient Rube Goldberg machine that fires a gun gun. Some commentators are saying that by removing the safety of the operator from the equation changes things. Sure, it alters the ethics, but that doesn’t change the nature of machine itself.