this post was submitted on 19 Apr 2024
372 points (97.7% liked)

Technology

59374 readers
3463 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The aircraft flew up to speeds of 1,200mph. DARPA did not reveal which aircraft won the dogfight.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 10 points 6 months ago (24 children)

What if the human is pulling the trigger to "paint the target" and tag it for hunt and destroy then the drone goes and kills it? Because that's how lots of missles already work. So where's the line?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 6 months ago (9 children)

The line is where an automatic process target and execute a human being. When it is automated. The arming of a device is not sufficient to warrant a human interaction, and as such mines are also not allowed.

This should in my opinion always have been the case. Mines are indiscriminate and have proven to be wildly inhumane in several ways. Significantly, innocents are often killed.

But mines don't paint the picture of what automated slaughter can lead to.

The point has been laid that when the conscious mind has to kill, it makes war have an important way to end, in the mind.

The dangers extend well beyond killing innocent targets, another part is the coldness of allowing a machine to decide, that is beyond morally corrupt. There is something terrifying about the very idea that facing one of these weapons, there is nothing to negotiate, the cold calculations that want to kill you are not human. It is a place where no human ever wants to be. But war is horrible. It's the escalation of automated triggers that can lead to exponential death with no remorse which is just a terrible danger.

The murder weapons has nobody's intent behind them, except very far back, in the arming and the program. It open for scenarios where mass murder becomes easy and terrifyingly cold.

Kind of like the prisoner's dilemma shows us, that when war escalates, it can quickly devolve into revenge narratives, and when either side has access to cold impudent kills, they will use them. This removes even more humanity from the acts and the violence can reach new heights beyond our comprehension.

Weapons of mass destruction with automated triggers will eventually seal our existence if we don't abolish it with impunity. It has been seen over and over how the human factor is the only grace that ever end or contain war. Without this component I think we are just doomed to have the last intent humans ever had was revenge, and the last emotions fear and complete hopelessness.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (8 children)

Well, that's all very idealistic, but it's likely not going to happen.

Israel already used AI to pick bombing sites, those bombs and missiles would have been programmed with altitudes and destinations (armed) then dropped. The pilots only job these days is to avoid interception, fly over the bombing locations, tag the target when acquired, and drop them. Most of this is already done in software.

Eventually humans will leave the loop because unlike self-driving cars, these technologies won't risk the lives of the aggressor's citizens.

If the technology is seen as unstoppable enough, there may be calls for warnings to be given, but I suspect that's all the mercy that will be shown...

... especially if it's a case of a country with automated technologies killing one without or with stochastically meaningless defenses (eg. Defenses that modelling and simulations show won't be able to prevent such attacks).

No, in all likelihood the US will tell the country the attack sites, the country either will or will not have the technical level to prevent an amount of damage, will evacuate all necessary personal, and whoever doesn't get the message or get out in time will be automatically killed.

Where defenses are partially successful, that information will go into the training data for the next model, or upgrade, and the war machine will roll on.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Sorry I was stressed when replying. Yeah in those cases humans have pulled the trigger. At several stages.

When arming a murder bot ship and sending to erase an island of life, you then lose control. That person is not pulling loads and loads of triggers. The triggers are automatic by a machine making the decision to end these lives.

And that is a danger, same as with engineered bio warfare. It just cannot be let out of the box even, or we all may die extremely quick.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)