Anti-killer robot campaign kicks off

A human rights group is campaigning to prohibit the creation of autonomous “killer robots”

November 20, 2012
Robots

Hollywood-style robots able to shoot people without permission from their human handlers are a real possibility and must be banned before governments start deploying them, campaigners warned Monday.

The report “Losing Humanity” — issued by Human Rights Watch and Harvard Law School’s International Human Rights Clinic — raised the alarm over the ethics of the looming technology.

Calling them “killer robots,” the report urged “an international treaty that would absolutely prohibit the development, production, and use of fully autonomous weapons.”

The US military already leads the way in military robots, notably the unmanned aircraft or drones used for surveillance or attacks over Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen and elsewhere. But these are controlled by human operators in ground bases and are not able to kill without authorization.

Fully autonomous robots that decide for themselves when to fire could be developed within 20 to 30 years, or “even sooner,” the 50-page report said, adding that weapon systems that require little human intervention already exist.

Raytheon’s Phalanx gun system, deployed on US Navy ships, can search for enemy fire and destroy incoming projectiles all by itself. The X47B is a plane-sized drone able to take off and land on aircraft carriers without a pilot and even refuel in the air.

Perhaps closest to the Terminator-type killing machine portrayed in Arnold Schwarzenegger’s action films is a Samsung sentry robot already being used in South Korea, with the ability to spot unusual activity, talk to intruders and, when authorized by a human controller, shoot them.

Fully autonomous fighting machines would spare human troops from dangerous situations. The downside, though, is that robots would then be left to make nuanced decisions on their own, the most fraught being the need to distinguish between civilians and combatants in a war zone.

“A number of governments, including the United States, are very excited about moving in this direction, very excited about taking the soldier off the battlefield and putting machines on the battlefield and thereby lowering casualties,” said Steve Goose, arms division director at Human Rights Watch.

While Goose said “killer robots” do not exist as yet, he warned of precursors and added that the best way to forestall an ethical nightmare is a “preemptive, comprehensive prohibition on the development or production of these systems.”

Jody Williams, the 1997 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, said in Washington that the prospect of killer robots “totally freaked me out.”

“I had visions of the Terminator,” she said. “The thought that this development was proceeding without any public discussion I found more reprehensible than most military R&D because I really believe that this would… totally transform the face of warfare.”

The problem with handing over decision-making power to even the most sophisticated robots is that there would be no clear way of making anyone answer for the inevitable mistakes, said Noel Sharkey, professor of robotics at University of Sheffield.

“If a robot goes wrong, who’s accountable? It certainly won’t be the robot,” he said.

“The robot could take a bullet in its computer and go berserk. So there’s no way of really determining who’s accountable and that’s very important for the laws of war.”

Related articles

Toyota introduces robot helper

Robot cheetah is faster than Usain Bolt

Robot gadgets you want

The tech behind Curiosity

Tags: Active, machines, robots

Anonymous News Tip
Free Email Newsletter:
Subscribe
X

Anonymous News Tip






Captcha image
Not readable? Change text.

sending

Shutterstock is the image partner of MyBroadband – technology images can be found here

Join the conversation

Connect with MyBB

twitterfacebookandroidappleblackberrynewsletterfeed

Poll

Are you using public WiFi hotspots to connect to the Internet in places like airports, restaurants or shopping malls?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

More News

MTN’s 79c per minute changes the game

MTN 79c

It’s notable that MTN’s gone from being attacked to the one doing the attacking

Single line of code that broke online security

OpenSSL

OpenSSL’s security loophole, dubbed Heartbleed, has revealed a fundamental truth about the internet: we should not take goodwill for granted

Sponsorship causes MTN tender investigation — report

MTN logo

MTN has considered a potential conflict of interest in extending a contract awarded to the company that manages its call centres, the Sunday Times reported

Black manufacturers will benefit from digital TV policy — DoC

Non-compliant DVB-T2 set-top box in South Africa

Spokesman for the department of communications, Siya Qoza, hits back at those critical of encrypted set-top boxes and his department

bool(true)