Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UN Debates Rules Surrounding Killer Robots

Posted by timothy on from the nothing-c-c-c-can-go-wrong-n-n-nothing-can-go dept.

First time accepted submitter khb writes "It seems that the UN has started a debate on whether to place limits or bans on robots that can kill without manual supervision. It seems that bombs are viewed as 'kinder' than robots which might be programmed to achieve specific ends (e.g. destroy that bridge, kill anyone carrying a gun, etc.)."

1 of 215 comments (clear)

  1. Re:robots can't kill people by SplashMyBandit · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    The reason they are modded up is because I post citations. The citations happen to be links to statistics and facts. You may not like the statistics and facts but it turns out that the scientifically-minded Slashdotters do. I'm not sorry if statistics and facts upset your cosy (but incorrect) worldview. If you disagree with me, then all you have to do is present countering statistics and facts. I will listen, I promise. This is how the Scientific Method works.

    Note, while you may consider my post to be "off topic" simply because you have different political views, my post was explaining *why* the UN raised this resolution about drones by providing background. I'm trying to fill in background for those who are interested in how multiple aspects of our modern world are related. Does this explain why the same stuff keeps coming up in my posts - because it *is* all related. The UN HRC 16/18 is related to the OIC is related to 9/11 is related to the Boston Bombing is related to Afghanistan is related to Osama is related to Syria today is related to Israel is related to the United Nations is related to the London murder of Lee Rigby is related to last week's six nights of burning Stockholm is related to the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood is related to Iran is related to the political goals of the far Left is related to modern history. If this bores you then please simply ignore my posts. But allow the right of me to write facts as I know them and the *even more important* right of Slashdotters to read the citations and reference I provide (and paraphrase for their convenience). Views that are unpopular (like mine) are not necessary incorrect. Please respect that - it is how science gets done.