Slashdot Mirror


Top US General Warns Against Rogue Killer Robots (thehill.com)

Long-time Slashdot reader Zorro quotes The Hill: The second-highest-ranking general in the U.S. military last Tuesday warned lawmakers against equipping the armed forces with autonomous weapons systems... Gen. Paul Selva warned lawmakers that the military should keep "the ethical rules of war in place lest we unleash on humanity a set of robots that we don't know how to control. I don't think it's reasonable for us to put robots in charge of whether or not we take a human life," Selva told the committee.
There's already a Defense Department directive that requires humans in the decision-making process for lethal autonomous weapons systems. But it expires later this year...

5 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Headline should read by ranton · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Imagine someone hacking those robots and turning them against your citizens or all humans. Don't you want a way to stop them?
    Don't forget all the recent hacks. Everything is hackable with enough determination and resources. And military robots sure are a very good target.

    Those are very real potential threats, but probably the most real threat is enemy nations having better military technology than us ("us" is relative). The mere existence of nuclear weapons is also an existential threat, but no where near as dangerous as only your enemies having nuclear weapons.

    The military doesn't have the luxury of holding back because of the worry about all the negative consequences of new military technology. If the technology can exist, someone will develop it. The best defense I can think of is developing it yourself so at least you can understand the true dangers and potentially build countermeasures against them.

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
  2. Re:Movies by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I love the modern idea that works of fiction, specifically written to advance a particular point of view, are somehow indicative of how reality works. It's a movie, it's entertainment.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  3. Chemical and Biological Weapons by monkeyxpress · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The military doesn't have the luxury of holding back because of the worry about all the negative consequences of new military technology. If the technology can exist, someone will develop it. The best defense I can think of is developing it yourself so at least you can understand the true dangers and potentially build countermeasures against them.

    Yet we use this 'luxury' when it comes to many types of existing weapons. And what choice does humanity have? We are well beyond local tribes with spears and shields. The western minority powers can literally make everybody on the planet extinct if they want. If we must just accept that there is no way to build lasting peace, then we are simply counting down to our own extinction as every generation of smartphone gets better at ordering pizza and looking up trivia.

    The thing that scares me the most about these weapons however, is that it removes the democratic element of war. to fight a war you need a powerful army but also a loyal army. That same mass of armed civilians can turn against a ruler if they lose their populous appeal. This is why countries like north korean must run massive propaganda campaigns, and why much of the key to the rise of fascism was its ability to use new forms of mass media. It is why a free press and education are seen as essential elements in the fight against a repeat of humanity's past atrocities.

    But once you have autonomous armies, you no longer need trained civilians. A government can indeed use that army to control citizens and ensure it remains in power against majority rule. The political implications of this should scare anyone - we have never really had such a threat before. For me this threat from within is far greater than the meaningless risk of open conflict between nuclear armed states.

  4. Re:no longer need trained civilians by Dareth · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Remember that terminators that can kill people can serve tea as well. The rich and powerful will control these resources and not need that many other people. Every time I read an article on UBI - Universal Basic Income, I think it is more likely to get UBG - Universal Basic Genocide.

    --

    I only look human.
    My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
  5. Re:Everyone else warns against rogue killer genera by number6x · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Land mines can be thought of as fully autonomous robots. Perhaps the simplest case of a 'robot'.

    Very simple predetermined command to follow: 'When your trigger is tripped, execute your explosion sequence.'

    Most nations have banned the use of land mines because of their uncontrolled, autonomous behavior. Once they are set, they stay set and will activate whether tripped by friend or foe.

    They will activate when tripped by the little child playing in the field years after the war is over.

    The problem the General recognizes in fully autonomous killer robots is the same problem encountered when land mines are used. The robots are just a more complex example.