
Killing with Autonomous Weapons Systems - Ice_cream_suit
https://warroom.armywarcollege.edu/articles/killing-autonomous-weapons-systems/
======
Ice_cream_suit
"Do technologies drive our values, or do our values drive our technologies? As
artificial intelligence and robotics become increasingly sophisticated and
capable, this question is increasingly exigent.

The recent United Nations Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) Group of
Governmental Experts on lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) served again
to raise important questions about the morality of these systems.

In the era of facial recognition and other advances in microelectronics and
open-source software, current technologies could soon allow robots to kill
independently of direct human control. So which comes first, technology or
values?

The answer is somewhere in the middle: our values must shape our development
and use of advanced A.I. and robotics, but we must also recognize that the
U.S. cannot be caught flat-footed by potential adversaries that develop and
deploy these weapons systems."

~~~
nercht12
"Do technologies drive our values, or do our values drive our technologies?"
This depends on the kind of values, IMO. Some values can be created when we
find something new that we want. Many values are subject to change. However,
some are not. The unchanging value in human community has driven the success
of Facebook. The desire for new frontiers has driven the creation and progress
of SpaceX. Tech usually evolves because we want it. Want to be defended? Make
something to defend yourself. Want to see if you can track a million bacteria?
Make a bacteria examiner.

People keep saying the advance of tech is inevitable. That's a bit of a
hyperbole. Humanity could stop at any time, but enough people see something
they want in new tech such that it won't stop. Still, whenever you think,
"Gee, maybe I should make a nano-battle-bot or a mega-laser" consider this:
Someone else might be making that too, but YOU don't have to be the one.

When the US built airplanes, everyone else invested in missile defenses.[1]
The lesson here is that, rather than trying to race your opponent to have the
tech first (thereby creating a self-fulfilling prophecy scenario, esp. if they
get ahold of it (e.g. atom bomb[2])), it might be better to start looking for
the antidote instead.

[1] Noted from an old PopSci article. Sorry, I can't recall which one.

[2] One could argue about the need for the bomb, but you're missing the point
of my analogy. Pick another example if you prefer.

