Formerly www.targetonmyback.blogspot.com Warhammer 40,000 conversions, 28mm scenery and vehicles, Lego and other toys
How big is the step from humans using drones to kill other humans to building lethal autonomous weapons systems that can kill on their own? Ethically and technologically, that's a huge leap. But military planners are working to build what some call "killer robots." And the UN wants them banned.
Quarks in action! It's as dramatic as it sounds, believe me. Quarks, Doctor Who etc = BBC property, though this design is mine. Killer Robots!
IN FLIGHT TO ANDREWS AFB: Defense Secretary Ashton Carter is pushing hard for artificial intelligence — but the US military will “never” unleash truly autonomous killing machines, he pledged today. “In many cases, and certainly whenever it comes to the application of force, there will never be true autonomy, because there’ll be human beings (in the loop),” Carter told Sydney and fellow reporter John Harper as they flew home to Washington. Carter’s trip to Austin and San Francisco had been all about outreach to the information technology community. In particular,, he said, “we’re making big investments” in autonomy, which is the centerpiece of Carter’s Third Offset Strategy to retain America’s high-tech edge. But, he emphasized, technology must operate within legal and ethical limits. This is the issue that Vice Chairman of the Vice Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Paul Selva, calls the Terminator Conundrum. The prestigious Defense Science Board, which recently released its summer study on the issue of autonomy, called for immediate action on the development of autonomous capabilities at the same time that it stressed the need for building verifiable trust in such weapons. DSB did not state whether weapons should be allowed to kill humans without a human in the loop. But the study authors say that, “when something goes wrong, as it will sooner or later, autonomous systems must allow other machine or human teammates to intervene, correct, or terminate actions in a timely and appropriate manner, ensuring directability. Finally, the machine must be auditable—in other words, be able to preserve and communicate an immutable, comprehensible record of the reasoning behind its decisions and actions after the fact.” Carter came down on the side of human intervention from the start. “Whatever the mix (of manned and unmanned systems), there’s always going to human judgment and discretion,” Carter said. “That’s both necessary and appropriate.” But isn’t that unilateral disarmament, I asked, when countries like Russia and China are at least talking about autonomous weapons control? As Army War College professor Andrew Hill and retired colonel Joseph Brecher argued in a recent essay, no one may particularly want a world with independent killer robots, but if there’s a big tactical disadvantage to making your robots wait for slow-moving human brains to order them to fire, then the logic of the prisoner’s dilemma forces both sides to go autonomous. No less a figure than the Pentagon’s top buyer, Frank Kendall, has publicly worried that, by insisting on human control, the US will suffer a self-inflicted disadvantage against less scrupulous foes. Carter and his deputy secretary, offset architect Bob Work, advocate “human-machine teaming,” a symbiotic approach in which humans provide insight, objectives, and guidance to the computers that carry out their orders. It’s essentially analogous to how commanders lead their human subordinates today, Carter argued. The subordinate, be it man or machine, acts on its own knowledge but within the tactical, legal, and ethical bounds set by its superiors. “Whether it’s a subordinate command, a manned aircraft, or an autonomous system, when you send it to use force, you want it to use the information on site to have the best effect,” Carter said, “(but) you set things up (in advance), give orders and instructions such that everything that is done, is done in a way that is compatible with the laws of armed conflict… as well as American military doctrine.” Many important military missions don’t involve the use of lethal force, Carter added, and those are the first fields we’ll see autonomous decision-making anyway. Missile defense often comes up in this context, since allocating different weapons — interceptors, lasers, jammers — to incoming missiles requires making technical judgments at several times the speed of sound. Today, Carter emphasized cyber and electronic warfare, the manipulation of digital information moving over a network (cyber) and/or through the electromagnetic spectrum (EW). (The two fields overlap in the case of wireless networks). “People tend to want to think of autonomous systems for the use of lethal force,” Carter said, “but their most likely applications in the near-term and mid-term are for such tasks as scanning networks for vulnerabilities, scanning incoming traffic, and doing the kind of work that a cyber defense analyst needs to do today by hand.” Artificial intelligence could handle the microsecond-by-microsecond spread of a computer virus or the lock-on of an enemy targeting radar better than could slower-moving human brains. Giving an AI control of cyber defenses or radar jammers doesn’t give it the capability to kill anyone — at least not directly. But in a modern military, protecting networks, both wired and wireless, is still a matter of life and death. While we won’t yet be trusting robots to have their finger on the trigger, we’ll still be trusting them with our troops’ lives.
'Killer robots' are not science fiction - they're here https://www.irishtimes.com/business/innovation/killer-robots-are-not-science-fiction-they-re-here-1.3951632
Israel Aerospace Industries' Harpy drone, designed to automatically destroy radar emitters, among examples on new report
A push for a global agreement on autonomous weapons is stalled, much to the chagrin of advocates who believe a treaty is urgently needed.
Musk described the Facebook CEO’s knowledge of the field as ‘limited’ after Zuckerberg publicly dismissed AI doomsday warnings as ‘irresponsible’
HUMANS face an “awful future” where machines “decide who lives and who dies” if we don’t ban killer robots now, an expert has warned. Calls are growing for countries to come together and stop…
Could you imagine a robot takeover beginning anywhere other than a major automobile factory? It only makes sense—car plants are already some of the most automated, robot-packed spots on the...
Science fiction has made us vigilant of ‘killer robots’ in our midst, but they’re far closer than many of us realise.
Adam Morton worked for the University of British Columbia and says the migration to other planets could be disastrous for mankind's long-term survival.
Quincy News: Well ahead of the Singularity, in the City of Saint Francis, city officials have approved the San Francisco Police Department to use killer robots. What could possibly go wrong?
Mazinger Z
Mosquito Killer Robot created in PARTsolutionsMore info here: http://b2b.partcommunity.com/community/partcloud/index#!part?name=Mosquito+Killer+Robot
Freelance senior concept designer, no commission, no NFT.
@setsumiuou_arts
