Robotics Revolution Collides With Laws of War
This is a discussion on Robotics Revolution Collides With Laws of War within the International Law News forum, part of the Law News category; Observers of the ongoing conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have hotly debated the wisdom of using unmanned drone aircraft to ...
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
News
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 120
|
Observers of the ongoing conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have hotly debated the wisdom of using unmanned drone aircraft to carry out military operations.* These debates have taken place within the traditional laws-of-war rubric for assessing tactics and strategy: did the attack accomplish a military objective and*did it minimize the risk of civilian casualties?* However, the substitution of machines for men in an ever-increasing number of combat roles means that armies, governments, and legal scholars will have to rethink the laws of war as they apply to robot belligerents.
The trend towards employing more sophisticated machines in larger and larger numbers will only accelerate, writes PW Singer in his new book, Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century.* The American military has already recognized the myriad benefits of robot warfare, including greater accuracy, reduced risk to personnel, and much more cost-effective operations.* Consequently, the Pentagon plans to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in developing and deploying machine warriors.* However, as Singer discusses, no concomitant investment in fleshing out the legal ramifications of killing machines exists.* The laws of war do not have a framework established for evaluating the next step in weaponized robot technology - one where the machine has no human controller.* Under the current legal paradigm, in the absence of a person to appear before a tribunal as the responsible actor, mistakes might go unpunished. Wendell Wallach and Colin Allen in*Moral Machines: Teaching Robots Right from Wrong, take some of the first steps toward imagining how robots could make ethical choices.* They examine serious shortcomings in the ability of current choice algorithms to yield predictably good, safe, legal outcomes.* As a result, in the absence of human control, they, along with Singer, advocate restricting the weaponry available to mechanized combatants to nonlethal weaponry only. For*further information, please click here and here. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmark & Share |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| The Antitrust Revolution is Underway, But How Far Can It Go? | WSJ Law Blog | Law News | 0 | Feb 1st, 2010 10:50 AM |
| 'Drug war' attorney: Time to change pot laws | forum_admin | Attorneys & Legal Ethics | 0 | Nov 17th, 2009 04:14 PM |
| School robotics promotional video | Unregistered | Other Nonprofit Law Issues | 1 | Sep 15th, 2009 01:03 PM |
| He Fought the War, and (For Now) the War Won | WSJ Law Blog | Law News | 0 | May 19th, 2009 05:30 PM |
| Pole-Dancing and the Law: 1st Amendment Collides With Zoning | WSJ Law Blog | Law News | 0 | Aug 29th, 2008 12:20 PM |
Criminal law issues? Contact leading defense lawyers now! Free immediate consultation!
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:38 AM.








Linear Mode

