United Nations To Debate Ban on Killer Robots

[BrotherRool]

The Atomics Avenger seems to indicate otherwise, from what I've read the US plans to have combat UAV's in squadron sizes to fight along side their human flown counterparts.
Some info on the Avenger:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Atomics_Avenger

Robotic fighters are already on the front lines, in the air, on the ground and at sea. The UN ban means nothing when their too late and no-one will listen to them. Especially since their silly bans, a robot doesn't kill out of hate or discrimination, it follows the rules with no emotions to interfere.

I couldn't tell from the article alone, but that wouldn't necessarily contradict this. It depends whether you're talking about 'autonomous-killing' machines or autonomous 'killing machines'. It's the former which the US frowns upon (in fact I don't believe they have any at the moment) and would be easiest to treaty. That's where every action that could result in someones death has to be initiated by a human, whether at the site or by pressing the 'release missiles' button all the way back in the US. A fully autonomous killing machine (and I think what the guy was talking about here) is one that confirms the target and initiates the attack by itself.

 

[RicoADF]

I couldn't tell from the article alone, but that wouldn't necessarily contradict this. It depends whether you're talking about 'autonomous-killing' machines or autonomous 'killing machines'. It's the former which the US frowns upon (in fact I don't believe they have any at the moment) and would be easiest to treaty. That's where every action that could result in someones death has to be initiated by a human, whether at the site or by pressing the 'release missiles' button all the way back in the US. A fully autonomous killing machine (and I think what the guy was talking about here) is one that confirms the target and initiates the attack by itself.

Avengers are capable (as are other armed robots) of identifying targets and engaging themselves without human say so, they are given are area to protect and they rely on their own AI. There are even missiles that do that called LAM's that others in this topic have mentioned that are currently in use by the US which can both identify a target and decide on it's attack path based on what the target is.
As I said, their already on the front lines and proven to work. The UN can ban all it wants, the pandora's box is already open.

 

[BrotherRool]

Avengers are capable (as are other armed robots) of identifying targets and engaging themselves without human say so, they are given are area to protect and they rely on their own AI. There are even missiles that do that called LAM's that others in this topic have mentioned that are currently in use by the US which can both identify a target and decide on it's attack path based on what the target is.
As I said, their already on the front lines and proven to work. The UN can ban all it wants, the pandora's box is already open.

Pandora's box doesn't work when talking about military treaties and weapons. There have been countless weapons that were invented, actively used and then banned by treaty successfully. In fact it's probably reasonable to state that most weapons that have been banned by international treaty, existed first.

Also I was wondering if you had information about automated strikes? I can find articles talking about how drones utilise a man in the loop policy in all systems to avoid automated engaging of targets but I haven't found anything more recent than 2010 and I'm willing to believe policy has changed. (Or if your in a position to know that for definite that'd be just as cool)

EDIT: I found an article from 2012 talking about the Deputy Defense Secretary taking steps to make sure that the US restricts it's purchase of automated drones

"Before the Pentagon agrees to develop or buy new autonomous or somewhat autonomous weapons, a team of senior Pentagon officials and military officers will have to certify that the design itself ?incorporates the necessary capabilities to allow commanders and operators to exercise appropriate levels of human judgment in the use of force.?"

http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/11/human-robot-kill/

 

[Strazdas]

Why not just have killer robots fight other killer robots? No actual death, awesome robo combat, and a whole new sport we can bet on.

They already tried that in the UK. Robot wars was a popular series going strong until a producer decided that they did not like the show and forced it to fail by moving it to a horrible timeslot

Well yeeeeeeah, but robot wars wan't exactly Terminator versus Robocop. They had giant cheese slice versus spiky-frisbee-tron.

Thats because terminator and robocop are very ineficient and vcvulnerable designs of robots that would not work in real life. they are good for movies where you always need a two arms two legs creatures, because human prejudice, but in reality that desing is extremely poor for armed combat.