4 ms·
Indeed. Usually weapons are banned if the damage is high and indiscriminate while the military usefulness is low. There is at this moment little evidence that
by tmnvdb 2y ago
Indeed. Usually weapons are banned if the damage is high and indiscriminate while the military usefulness is low.
There is at this moment little evidence that autonomous weapons will cause more collateral damage than artillery shells and regular air strikes. The military usefulness on other other hand seems to be very high and increasing.
- bluefirebrand 2y agoIt seems like the sort of thing we shouldn't be wanting evidence of in order to avoid, though Like skydiving without a parachute, I think we should accept it is a bad idea without needing a double blind study
- tmnvdb 2y agoThe risks needs to be weighed against the downside of not deploying a capable system against your enemies.
- int_19h 2y agoIt's a bit too late for that, since Ukraine and Russia are both already using AI-controlled drones in combat.
- vasco 2y agoNot all is bad, it's preferable to have autonomous systems killing each other than killing humans. If it gets very prevalent you could even get to a point where war is just simulated war games. Why have an AI piloted F-35 fight a AI piloted J-36? Just do it on the computer. It's at least 1 or 2 less pilots that die in that case.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]