"The Dangerous Rise Of Military AI" Topic

"Autonomous machines capable of deadly force are increasingly prevalent in modern warfare, despite numerous ethical concerns. Is there anything we can do to halt the advance of the killer robots?

The video is stark. Two menacing men stand next to a white van in a field, holding remote controls. They open the van's back doors, and the whining sound of quadcopter drones crescendos. They flip a switch, and the drones swarm out like bats from a cave. In a few seconds, we cut to a college classroom. The killer robots flood in through windows and vents. The students scream in terror, trapped inside, as the drones attack with deadly force. The lesson that the film, Slaughterbots, is trying to impart is clear: tiny killer robots are either here or a small technological advance away. Terrorists could easily deploy them. And existing defences are weak or nonexistent.

Some military experts argued that Slaughterbots – which was made by the Future of Life Institute, an organisation researching existential threats to humanity – sensationalised a serious problem, stoking fear where calm reflection was required. But when it comes to the future of war, the line between science fiction and industrial fact is often blurry. The US air force has predicted a future in which "Swat teams will send mechanical insects equipped with video cameras to creep inside a building during a hostage standoff". One "microsystems collaborative" has already released Octoroach, an "extremely small robot with a camera and radio transmitter that can cover up to 100 metres on the ground". It is only one of many "biomimetic", or nature-imitating, weapons that are on the horizon…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

As long as they are programed only to "slaughter" the enemy, e.g. ISIS, AQ, etc., etc. … What's not to like ?

Can Sonnet be far behind?

15 Oct 2020 3:02 p.m. PST
As long as they are programed only to "slaughter" the enemy, e.g. ISIS, AQ, etc., etc. … What's not to like ?

You do realise terrorists have been quick to adopt these kind of technologies? Indeed ISIS et al adopted kamikaze drones several years ago whilst most militaries on the planet have not.

Thus terrorists will probably be amongst the first to introduce swarm drones and they will no doubt at some stage unleash them on civilian populations in the west.

And note that whilst the US may have been the leader in drones, other countries are catching up (eg look at that Chinese swarm drone).

Drones are extremely cheap so even poor countries and terrorist groups can develop them quickly.

"I'll. Be back"

You do realise terrorists have been quick to adopt these kind of technologies?

Yes I do … but that just means we need to push the envelope and field more deadly no-WMD weapons systems when it comes to ridding the planets of groups like ISIS, AQ, etc.

Of course as always we have to be a little less concerned about CD. As we know the insurgent moves among and use civilians to their advantage. Plus as we also know they get tacit support directly or indirectly from some "non-combatants".

In Syria there a number of camps full of ISIS fighters and their wives & children. Albeit they are kept in separate camps. They are both running their own "Caliphates". Many should and will be charged with a number of "war crimes", etc. But before that happens they are growing the next generation of terrorists.

And once convicted, they should be put to death. But AFAIK the World Court, etc. does not have the death penalty. So those guilty or not will have to "housed", fed, etc. for the rest of their natural lives. We certainly can't release them. I don't think these types can be "rehabed". Why even risk it ?

So bottom line, IMO, develop and use high and low tech to "terminate" with extreme prejudice" these types. In large numbers, when ever given the chance. And limit our concerns about CD.

So no matter what weapons are available to them, they can't use them if they are dead.

I'm a former old Infantry Officer, IMO the best way to end a threat is to remove it totally.

(smile)

Amicalement
Armand

Ethical concerns aside, once the genie's out of the bottle you can't put her back in.

And that has been said and occurred a number of times in the past.