4 ms·

Why not make a robot that takes down the shooter? Doesn't need to kill. Just tackle the person and pin them down. A bit of armor would do it, right?

chrisweekly 4y ago
Mixed feelings about involvement of robots at all, but ABSOLUTELY YES the use of NON-LETHAL FORCE is outrageously under-utilized in every kind of policing IRL and as depicted in popular media. Set em on stun, FFS.
- eternalban 4y ago
  I wonder if what is really happening, whether by design or a misaligned universe, is that firms that build these devices are really building for the military, and the thoughtless trend of militarizing police forces is intensifying. Why do I say this? Because the idea to use non-lethal force is frankly obvious and various think tanks were looking at this stuff for years. Ditto concerns over lethal robots. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RBA654-1.html https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RBA654-1.html https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/02/us-rejects-calls-regulating-banning-killer-robots https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/02/us-rejects-c... https://www.uclalawreview.org/policing-police-robots/ https://www.uclalawreview.org/policing-police-robots/ abstract: Just as they will change healthcare, manufacturing, and the military, robots have the potential to produce big changes in policing. We can expect that at least some robots used by the police in the future will be artificially intelligent machines capable of using legitimate coercive force against human beings. Police robots may decrease dangers to police officers by removing them from potentially volatile situations. Those suspected of crimes may also risk less injury if robots can assist the police in conducting safer detentions, arrests, and searches. At the same time, however, the use of robots introduces new questions about how the law and democratic norms should guide policing decisions—questions which have yet to be addressed in any systematic way. How we design, regulate, or even prohibit some uses of police robots requires a regulatory agenda now to address foreseeable problems of the future.
  - eternalban 4y ago
    That last cite actually answered my own question: "The future of robotic policing can now be found in developments within the military.(54) The military has used remote controlled robots for more than a decade.(55) The Department of Defense is preparing for a future in which nearly autonomous robots will play a central role in warfare.(56) Consequently, the military is spending the most money and attention on robotics." (54). [P.W. Singer, Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the Twenty-First Century (2009)], supra note 20, at 78 (observing that the “military sets the agenda in AI”).
XorNot 4y ago
Or a drone which dives bombs with a tazer. That's the worst thing about this: robotics should mean that we have options because robots are replaceable and should be expendable. But this tells you the real story: an expensive robot is more valuable then a human life.
heavyset_go 4y ago
Perhaps it can ask the shooter to "please put down your weapon, you have 40 seconds to comply", giving them an opportunity to surrender before unloading a machine gun into them[1]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFvqDaFpXeM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFvqDaFpXeM

chrisweekly 4y ago

Mixed feelings about involvement of robots at all, but ABSOLUTELY YES the use of NON-LETHAL FORCE is outrageously under-utilized in every kind of policing IRL and as depicted in popular media. Set em on stun, FFS.

eternalban 4y ago
I wonder if what is really happening, whether by design or a misaligned universe, is that firms that build these devices are really building for the military, and the thoughtless trend of militarizing police forces is intensifying. Why do I say this? Because the idea to use non-lethal force is frankly obvious and various think tanks were looking at this stuff for years. Ditto concerns over lethal robots. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RBA654-1.html https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RBA654-1.html https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/02/us-rejects-calls-regulating-banning-killer-robots https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/02/us-rejects-c... https://www.uclalawreview.org/policing-police-robots/ https://www.uclalawreview.org/policing-police-robots/ abstract: Just as they will change healthcare, manufacturing, and the military, robots have the potential to produce big changes in policing. We can expect that at least some robots used by the police in the future will be artificially intelligent machines capable of using legitimate coercive force against human beings. Police robots may decrease dangers to police officers by removing them from potentially volatile situations. Those suspected of crimes may also risk less injury if robots can assist the police in conducting safer detentions, arrests, and searches. At the same time, however, the use of robots introduces new questions about how the law and democratic norms should guide policing decisions—questions which have yet to be addressed in any systematic way. How we design, regulate, or even prohibit some uses of police robots requires a regulatory agenda now to address foreseeable problems of the future.
- eternalban 4y ago
  That last cite actually answered my own question: "The future of robotic policing can now be found in developments within the military.(54) The military has used remote controlled robots for more than a decade.(55) The Department of Defense is preparing for a future in which nearly autonomous robots will play a central role in warfare.(56) Consequently, the military is spending the most money and attention on robotics." (54). [P.W. Singer, Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the Twenty-First Century (2009)], supra note 20, at 78 (observing that the “military sets the agenda in AI”).

XorNot 4y ago

Or a drone which dives bombs with a tazer. That's the worst thing about this: robotics should mean that we have options because robots are replaceable and should be expendable. But this tells you the real story: an expensive robot is more valuable then a human life.

heavyset_go 4y ago

Perhaps it can ask the shooter to "please put down your weapon, you have 40 seconds to comply", giving them an opportunity to surrender before unloading a machine gun into them[1]. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFvqDaFpXeM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFvqDaFpXeM