Should We Ban Killer Robots?. Deane Baker

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ employment of LAWS; there certainly should be. Indeed, I have had the privilege of working alongside a group of international experts to try to outline a first attempt at a set of guiding principles for the international community now titled ‘Guiding Principles for the Development and Use of LAWS’. But that is not the focus of this book. Instead, my argument here is focused on showing that we do not in fact have compelling reasons to ban ‘killer robots’.

A Definition

Before proceeding, I do, of course, have to clarify what this phenomenon is that is the focus of our investigation. While ‘killer robots’ is much racier than ‘lethal autonomous weapons’, we are on firmer ground with the latter terminology; so, going forward, that is what I will generally use. So then, what exactly is a lethal autonomous weapon? There is, as yet, no universally accepted definition, and some parties to the debate have been accused (perhaps with some justification) of playing definitional games. There is, however, growing acceptance of the definition put forward by the International Committee of the Red Cross and Red Crescent (ICRC), according to which an autonomous weapon is

      [a]ny weapon system with autonomy in its critical functions. That is, a weapon system which can select (i.e. search for or detect, identify, track, select) and attack (i.e. use force against, neutralize, damage or destroy) targets without human intervention. (ICRC 2016, pp. 11–12, n. 2)

Despite being widely accepted, this definition is not without shortcomings. In particular, some of the terminology is, arguably, loaded. ‘Select’ carries an implication of deliberate cognitive activity, which may not be an appropriate description of how many autonomous weapons do or will function; ‘discern’ or ‘identify’ would be a more neutral alternative. Likewise, ‘attack’ is a loaded term in this context, given the importance of the question of the point at which human agency is relevant; ‘engage’ would, again, be a more neutral alternative. Nonetheless, for the purposes of this volume, I will take it that the ICRC definition is a sufficiently accurate description of the phenomenon under consideration to enable us to weigh up whether or not a ban is necessary.

      1 1. The formal name of the group is the Group of Governmental Experts on Emerging Technologies in the Area of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (GGE LAWS) of the High Contracting Parties to the Convention on Prohibitions of Restrictions on the Use of Certain Conventional Weapons Which May Be Deemed to Be Excessively Injurious or to Have Indiscriminate Effects (CCW).

      Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.

      Текст предоставлен ООО «ЛитРес».

      Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию на ЛитРес.

      Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.

/9j/4AAQSkZJRgABAQEBLAEsAAD/7RkAUGhvdG9zaG9wIDMuMAA4QklNBAQAAAAAADscAVoAAxsl RxwCAAACAAAcAgUAJ0Jha2VyX1Nob3VsZCB3ZSBCYW4gS2lsbGVyIFJvYm90czIuaW5kZAA4QklN BCUAAAAAABCrqx2dYGjME6+QmjlI5NDwOEJJTQQ6AAAAAADlAAAAEAAAAAEAAAAAAAtwcmludE91 dHB1dAAAAAUAAAAAUHN0U2Jvb2wBAAAAAEludGVlbnVtAAAAAEludGUAAAAAQ2xybQAAAA9wcmlu dFNpeHRlZW5CaXRib29sAAAAAAtwcmludGVyTmFtZVRFWFQAAAABAAAAAAAPcHJpbnRQcm9vZlNl dHVwT2JqYwAAAAwAUAByAG8AbwBmACAAUwBlAHQAdQBwAAAAAAAKcHJvb2ZTZXR1cAAAAAEAAAAA Qmx0bmVudW0AAAAMYnVpbHRpblByb29mAAAACXByb29mQ01ZSwA4QklNBDsAAAAAAi0AAAAQAAAA AQAAAAAAEnByaW50T3V0cHV0T3B0aW9ucwAAABcAAAAAQ3B0bmJvb2wAAAA

СКАЧАТЬ