[img][/img]LONDON (Reuters) - Machines
with the ability to attack targets
without any human intervention
must be banned before they are
developed for use on the
battlefield, campaigners against
"killer robots" urged on Tuesday.
The weapons, which could be
ready for use within the next 20
years, would breach a moral and
ethical boundary that should
never be crossed, said Nobel
Laureate Jody Williams, of the
"Campaign To Stop Killer
Robots".
"If war is reduced to weapons
attacking without human beings
in control, it is going to be
civilians who are going to bear
the brunt of warfare," said
Williams, who won the 1997
peace prize for her work on
banning landmines.
Weapons such as remotely
piloted drones are already used
by some armed forces and
companies are working on
developing systems with a
greater level of autonomy in
flight and operation.
"We already have a certain
amount of autonomy," said Noel
Sharkey, professor of Artificial
Intelligence and Robotics at the
University of Sheffield.
"I think we are already there. If
you asked me to go and make
an autonomous killer robot
today, I could do it. I could have
you one here in a few days," he
told reporters.
But the technology is a long way
off being able to distinguish
between a soldier and a civilian.
"The idea of a robot being asked
to exercise human judgment
seems ridiculous to me," Sharkey
told Reuters.
"The whole idea of robots in the
battlefield muddies the waters
of accountability from my
perspective as a roboticist," he
added.
NO INTENTION
The British government has
always said it has no intention
of developing such technology.
"There are no plans to replace
skilled military personnel with
fully autonomous systems," a
Ministry of Defense spokesman
told Reuters.
"Although the Royal Navy does
have defensive systems, such as
Phalanx, which can be used in
an automatic mode to protect
personnel and ships from enemy
threats like missiles, a human
operator oversees the entire
engagement," the spokesman
added.
But the organizers of the
Campaign to Stop Killer Robots
say Britain's rejection of fully
autonomous weapons is not yet
watertight.
"We're concerned that there is a
slide towards greater autonomy
on the battlefield and unless we
draw a clear line in the sand
now, we may end up walking
into acceptance of fully
autonomous weapons," said
Thomas Nash, director of non-
governmental organization
Article 36.
Rapid advancements in
technology have allowed
countries such as the United
States, China, Russia, Israel and
Germany to move towards
systems that will soon give full
combat autonomy to machines,
according to a report by Human
Rights Watch.
"We think that these kinds of
weapons will not be able to
comply with international
humanitarian law," Steve Goose,
Human Rights Watch executive
director, told Reuters.
www.yahoo.com/news[img]LONDON (Reuters) - Machines
with the ability to attack targets
without any human intervention
must be banned before they are
developed for use on the
battlefield, campaigners against
"killer robots" urged on Tuesday.
The weapons, which could be
ready for use within the next 20
years, would breach a moral and
ethical boundary that should
never be crossed, said Nobel
Laureate Jody Williams, of the
"Campaign To Stop Killer
Robots".
"If war is reduced to weapons
attacking without human beings
in control, it is going to be
civilians who are going to bear
the brunt of warfare," said
Williams, who won the 1997
peace prize for her work on
banning landmines.
Weapons such as remotely
piloted drones are already used
by some armed forces and
companies are working on
developing systems with a
greater level of autonomy in
flight and operation.
"We already have a certain
amount of autonomy," said Noel
Sharkey, professor of Artificial
Intelligence and Robotics at the
University of Sheffield.
"I think we are already there. If
you asked me to go and make
an autonomous killer robot
today, I could do it. I could have
you one here in a few days," he
told reporters.
But the technology is a long way
off being able to distinguish
between a soldier and a civilian.
"The idea of a robot being asked
to exercise human judgment
seems ridiculous to me," Sharkey
told Reuters.
"The whole idea of robots in the
battlefield muddies the waters
of accountability from my
perspective as a roboticist," he
added.
NO INTENTION
The British government has
always said it has no intention
of developing such technology.
"There are no plans to replace
skilled military personnel with
fully autonomous systems," a
Ministry of Defense spokesman
told Reuters.
"Although the Royal Navy does
have defensive systems, such as
Phalanx, which can be used in
an automatic mode to protect
personnel and ships from enemy
threats like missiles, a human
operator oversees the entire
engagement," the spokesman
added.
But the organizers of the
Campaign to Stop Killer Robots
say Britain's rejection of fully
autonomous weapons is not yet
watertight.
"We're concerned that there is a
slide towards greater autonomy
on the battlefield and unless we
draw a clear line in the sand
now, we may end up walking
into acceptance of fully
autonomous weapons," said
Thomas Nash, director of non-
governmental organization
Article 36.
Rapid advancements in
technology have allowed
countries such as the United
States, China, Russia, Israel and
Germany to move towards
systems that will soon give full
combat autonomy to machines,
according to a report by Human
Rights Watch.
"We think that these kinds of
weapons will not be able to
comply with international
humanitarian law," Steve Goose,
Human Rights Watch executive
director, told Reuters.
www.yahoo.com/news[/img]LONDON (Reuters) - Machines
with the ability to attack targets
without any human intervention
must be banned before they are
developed for use on the
battlefield, campaigners against
"killer robots" urged on Tuesday.
The weapons, which could be
ready for use within the next 20
years, would breach a moral and
ethical boundary that should
never be crossed, said Nobel
Laureate Jody Williams, of the
"Campaign To Stop Killer
Robots".
"If war is reduced to weapons
attacking without human beings
in control, it is going to be
civilians who are going to bear
the brunt of warfare," said
Williams, who won the 1997
peace prize for her work on
banning landmines.
Weapons such as remotely
piloted drones are already used
by some armed forces and
companies are working on
developing systems with a
greater level of autonomy in
flight and operation.
"We already have a certain
amount of autonomy," said Noel
Sharkey, professor of Artificial
Intelligence and Robotics at the
University of Sheffield.
"I think we are already there. If
you asked me to go and make
an autonomous killer robot
today, I could do it. I could have
you one here in a few days," he
told reporters.
But the technology is a long way
off being able to distinguish
between a soldier and a civilian.
"The idea of a robot being asked
to exercise human judgment
seems ridiculous to me," Sharkey
told Reuters.
"The whole idea of robots in the
battlefield muddies the waters
of accountability from my
perspective as a roboticist," he
added.
NO INTENTION
The British government has
always said it has no intention
of developing such technology.
"There are no plans to replace
skilled military personnel with
fully autonomous systems," a
Ministry of Defense spokesman
told Reuters.
"Although the Royal Navy does
have defensive systems, such as
Phalanx, which can be used in
an automatic mode to protect
personnel and ships from enemy
threats like missiles, a human
operator oversees the entire
engagement," the spokesman
added.
But the organizers of the
Campaign to Stop Killer Robots
say Britain's rejection of fully
autonomous weapons is not yet
watertight.
"We're concerned that there is a
slide towards greater autonomy
on the battlefield and unless we
draw a clear line in the sand
now, we may end up walking
into acceptance of fully
autonomous weapons," said
Thomas Nash, director of non-
governmental organization
Article 36.
Rapid advancements in
technology have allowed
countries such as the United
States, China, Russia, Israel and
Germany to move towards
systems that will soon give full
combat autonomy to machines,
according to a report by Human
Rights Watch.
"We think that these kinds of
weapons will not be able to
comply with international
humanitarian law," Steve Goose,
Human Rights Watch executive
director, told Reuters.
www.yahoo.com/news