Pentagon hires British scientist to help build robot soldiers

Pentagon hires British scientist to help build robot soldiers

www.telegraph.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

So this is the future of warfare. It does sound like an effective deterrent against any hostilities against the USA/UK, but I wonder how these robots could potentially be used to suppress the public, and increase the surveillance society that we already live in.

The fact that they are building these robots seems to suggest that they might have grasped the early stages of what will become AI (in the sense that it is completely autonomous).

www.telegraph.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

I love the way the American military have needed outside help for ethics.

Of course, when American soldiers deployed with these machines suddenly start hearing the British National Anthem played over the battlefield, it might the be the first and last clue US Infantry have as to who the real enemy targets are for these machines! I can imagine these particular Redcoats marching in a very straight line indeed!

There's been a lot of threads based on 'Chinese chips' and foreign-based technology used by the American military on ATS over the last few months. Do the Americans see this any different?

In before 'Asimov got there first' type comments.

Whats even more hilarious is the source from whom they seek it.

Is there not something more constructive we could focus on besides war?

they play with fire! you cannot program a robot (in the pure sense of programming) to make moral decisions unless you allow the robot to learn and develope (using genetic programming, evolutive computing). But once you allow a computer to learn what is moral , it could find very surprising enemies..

The AI would be programmed from the bottom up. I'd assume that they'd leave out the undesirable characteristics.

reply to post by dodgygeeza

---

well, then you cannot make a truly moral robot, can you ? it would be so called "narrow AI" - it means that it is just a program running smart. A truly AI would be able to learn , make conclusions then even change its own program . It would be surprising what a true AI would find as moral! would that match humans ? would we all sudenly be the enemies???

[edit on 2-12-2008 by sty]

There's always something more constructive we could focus on. However, those arms dealers have got to pay the rent somehow. It's funny how you never hear of arms dealers amongst the displaced homeless or general casualties of war.

I've said it time and time again: if the same amount of effort and resources were ploughed into other areas such as health, education, alternative energies and so on rather than war and war technologies, there wouldn't be a fraction of the amount of war there is in the first place.

reply to post by Merriman Weir

---

in a way I believe that the AI can be the destroyer or the saviour for us. An AI used to create and enhance science / life , would be great. AI used to destroy and dominate the other side..

reply to post by Merriman Weir

---

Is this were ALL that bailout money is going?
Cause i dont see signs of it anywhere else!

i think it is more to do with Ai being able to make rational decisions based on the circumstances. I think the learning part would be limited as if a robot is programmed it will have boundaries. I think this is more to do with avoiding war crimes rather than preventing the death of human soldiers. Which ironically is immoral.

The way the military thinks about 'robot soldiers' is that they can send it into combat and it will make the right choice at the right time, All well and good in theory, but looka the actuallity of teaching a robot right from wrong'.
You've built said robot, 'taught' it and then given it a gun. you send it to a battle field where it can prove its worth to kill the 'enemy' .
Its charginging around firing at anything the programmers have decided 'looks' like an enemy.
Can a robot tell the difference between a fat civilian and a terrorist with a bomb vest?
Can a robot differentiate between an ak47 and a toy gun in the hands of a child?
Supposing and there are cases of children being utilised in war, at what age or height can the robot determine if someone is to young to fire a gun properly and doesn't really want to be there coz their scared, or there because they really want to 'kill the infidel' ( sorry for using current terminology from the 'War on terror' but if combat spills to the Asian countries or African states that use child soldiers then I'll amend terminology as needed.
Can a robot tell a scared person who has been told to fire a gun or "we'll kill your family" or someone of diminished mental capacity told to " go kill them and you'll get 70 virgins in heaven" because they've been persuaded?
There is only one reason to have a robot on the battlefield - to kill as many people as they can so they won't be able to mount a resistance to the occupying forces.
At least a Human soldier can make on the spot decisions to either tell the enemy combatant to " drop they're weapons" or just fire to wound / incapacitate. whereas a robot will shoot to kill , as per programming instructions.
Sure send a robot soldier into a cave system where you know for certain that all inside are enemy combatants, but in a town or city they will kill more civilians than soldiers.
Ethics for a robot is only as good as the ethics of the person programming or told to programme by the higher echelons which aint good at the best of times.