Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

European Parliament Passes Resolution Calling For An International Ban On Killer Robots (bbc.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the not-science-fiction dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from the BBC: The European Parliament has passed a resolution calling for an international ban on so-called killer robots. It aims to pre-empt the development and use of autonomous weapon systems that can kill without human intervention. Last month, talks at the UN failed to reach consensus on the issue, with some countries saying the benefits of autonomous weapons should be explored. And some MEPs were concerned legislation could limit scientific progress of artificial intelligence. While others said it could become a security issue if some countries allowed such weapons while others did not. The resolution comes ahead of negotiations scheduled at the United Nations in November, where it is hoped an agreement on an international ban can be reached. Israel, Russia, South Korea and the U.S. opposed the new measures, saying that they wanted to explore potential "advantages" from autonomous weapons systems.

6 of 115 comments (clear)

  1. Europe by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Spends a lot of time trying to ban, regulate and/or tax things in other countries.

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
    1. Re:Europe by sabri · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Europe spends a lot of time trying to ban, regulate and/or tax things in other countries.

      This. It's about time the EUSSR reconsiders what it tries to do. The EU as an institution is an undemocratic entity. Its "constitution" was illegally adopted, despite its citizens overwhelmingly voting against it.

      I had to seek refuge on another continent.

      --
      I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
    2. Re:Europe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He makes only makes two claims and they're both true

      He claims its constitution was illegally adopted. This is true. The French and Dutch rejected the European constitution in referendums in 2005. The EU renamed the "Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe" to the "Treaty of Lisbon" and changed the wording a bit to bypass the need for a referendum in France and the Netherlands, thus robbing those people of their legal right to a referendum.

      He claims the EU is an undemocratic entity. This is true. The most powerful branch of the EU is the European Commission which has the power to set laws. Members of the European Commission are not elected by the public. The second most powerful branch of the EU is the European Court of Justice, where the judges are also unelected. Of the seven institutions of the EU only members of the European Parliament are elected, but this is largely for show as the parliament has no power to create laws, only block laws passed down by the Commission. The forcing through of the European Constitution shows how undemocratic the EU is.

      How, then, is what he said not true?

  2. Say whaaat? by msauve · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "with some countries saying the benefits of autonomous weapons should be explored."

    What are these "benefits", and who are these countries?

    If it's just robots fighting robots so humans don't die, just do it in virtual cyberspace instead of building and destroying expensive hardware. Of course, either requires that everyone play by a common set of rules, and there are none in war.

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    1. Re:Say whaaat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Face reality: war happens when people have something worth fighting for, and think they stand a chance.

      You can't stop war by taking the weapons away. All you do is make one side weaker than it could be, which invites attack.

      The single most effective deterrent to violence is a credible threat of retaliatory violence. This is a simple fact known to every military force on earth. If you carry a big enough stick, you never need to swing it.

      Killer robots are that big stick. We need them, to prevent war.

      The right answer isn't always the most intuitive, nor the happiest.

    2. Re:Say whaaat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      You know thats one of the justifications for atomic weapons right.

      Yes, and it is a good one. Atomic weapons ended World War 2, and have done a fine job of preventing World War 3. At least so far.

      But, more reality here, "we" don't put people in power. Ostensibly power comes by vote but really it is all about wealth. There is an amazing smoke and mirrors show that leaves ordinary voters believing that they had a say. But it doesn't take much to see what's really going on. The wealthy use lobbyists and bribes (by various names) to control the government. The methods used to produce candidates and tally votes ensure that the only real contenders are the ones that are already part of the "in" crowd of wealthy aristocrats.

      Feel free to daydream about ways that "we" could stop "putting these people in power." They aren't threatened by such thoughts, because the reason you are even having them is because you have already bought into the farce they have set up.