informationliberation
The news you're not supposed to know...




An Introduction to Austrian Economics: Understand Economics, Understand Everything
The Century of the Self: The Untold History of Controlling the Masses Through the Manipulation of Unconscious Desires
The Disappearing Male: From Virility to Sterility

The Obama Deception: The Mask Comes Off
Operation Gladio: The Hidden History of U.S. Sponsored False Flag Terrorism in EuropeThe New American Century: The Untold History of The Project for the New American Century
(more)
Article posted Jan 30 2010, 5:09 PM Category: Tyranny/Police State Source: The Independent Print

The age of the killer robot is no longer a sci-fi fantasy

You can't appeal to robots for mercy or empathy - or punish them afterwards
Johann Hari


In the dark, in the silence, in a blink, the age of the autonomous killer robot has arrived. It is happening. They are deployed. And at their current rate of acceleration they will become the dominant method of war for rich countries in the 21st century. These facts sound, at first, preposterous. The idea of machines that are designed to whirr out into the world and make their own decisions to kill is an old sci-fi fantasy: picture a mechanical Arnold Schwarzenegger blasting a truck and muttering: "Hasta la vista, baby." But we live in a world of such whooshing technological transformation that the concept has leaped in just five years from the cinema screen to the battlefield with barely anyone back home noticing.

When the US invaded Iraq in 2003, they had no robots as part of their force. By the end of 2005, they had 2,400. Today, they have 12,000, carrying out 33,000 missions a year. A report by the US Joint Forces Command says autonomous robots will be the norm on the battlefield within 20 years.

The Nato forces now depend on a range of killer robots, largely designed by the British Ministry of Defence labs privatised by Tony Blair in 2001. Every time you hear about a "drone attack" against Afghanistan or Pakistan, that's an unmanned robot dropping bombs on human beings. Push a button and it flies away, kills, and comes home. Its robot-cousin on the battlefields below is called SWORDS: a human-sized robot that can see 360 degrees around it and fire its machine-guns at any target it "chooses". Fox News proudly calls it "the GI of the 21st century." And billions are being spent on the next generation of warbots, which will leave these models looking like the bulky box on which you used to play Pong.

At the moment, most are controlled by a soldier often 7,500 miles away with a control panel. But insurgents are always inventing new ways to block the signal from the control centre, which causes the robot to shut down and "die". So the military is building "autonomy" into the robots: if they lose contact, they start to make their own decisions, in line with a pre-determined code.

This is "one of the most fundamental changes in the history of human warfare," according to PW Singer, a former analyst for the Pentagon and the CIA, in his must-read book, Wired For War: The Robotics Revolution and Defence in the Twenty-First Century. Humans have been developing weapons that enabled us to kill at ever-greater distances and in ever-greater numbers for millennia, from the longbow to the cannon to the machine-gun to the nuclear bomb. But these robots mark a different stage.

The earlier technologies made it possible for humans to decide to kill in more "sophisticated" ways but once you programme and unleash an autonomous robot, the war isn't fought by you any more: it's fought by the machine. The subject of warfare shifts.

The military claim this is a safer model of combat. Gordon Johnson of the Pentagon's Joint Forces Command says of the warbots: "They're not afraid. They don't forget their orders. They don't care if the guy next to them has been shot. Will they do a better job than humans? Yes." Why take a risk with your soldier's life, if he can stay in Arlington and kill in Kandahar? Think of it as War 4.0.

But the evidence punctures this techno-optimism. We know the programming of robots will regularly go wrong because all technological programming regularly goes wrong. Look at the place where robots are used most frequently today: factories. Some 4 per cent of US factories have "major robotics accidents" every year a man having molten aluminium poured over him, or a woman picked up and placed on a conveyor belt to be smashed into the shape of a car. The former Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi was nearly killed a few years ago after a robot attacked him on a tour of a factory. And remember: these are robots that aren't designed to kill.

Think about how maddening it is to deal with a robot on the telephone when you want to pay your phone bill. Now imagine that robot had a machine-gun pointed at your chest.

Robots find it almost impossible to distinguish an apple from a tomato: how will they distinguish a combatant from a civilian? You can't appeal to a robot for mercy; you can't activate its empathy. And afterwards, who do you punish? Marc Garlasco, of Human Rights Watch, says: "War crimes need a violation and an intent. A machine has no capacity to want to kill civilians.... If they are incapable of intent, are they incapable of war crimes?"

Robots do make war much easier for the aggressor. You are taking much less physical risk with your people, even as you kill more of theirs. One US report recently claimed they will turn war into "an essentially frictionless engineering exercise". As Larry Korb, Ronald Reagan's assistant secretary of defence, put it: "It will make people think, 'Gee, warfare is easy.'"

If virtually no American forces had died in Vietnam, would the war have stopped when it did or would the systematic slaughter of the Vietnamese people have continued for many more years? If "we" weren't losing anyone in Afghanistan or Iraq, would the call for an end to the killing be as loud? I'd like to think we are motivated primarily by compassion for civilians on the other side, but I doubt it. Take "us" safely out of the picture and we will be more willing to kill "them".

There is some evidence that warbots will also make us less inhibited in our killing. When another human being is standing in front of you, when you can stare into their eyes, it's hard to kill them. When they are half the world away and little more than an avatar, it's easy. A young air force lieutenant who fought through a warbot told Singer: "It's like a video game [with] the ability to kill. It's like ... freaking cool."

When the US First Marine Expeditionary Force in Iraq was asked in 2006 what kind of robotic support it needed, they said they had an "urgent operational need" for a laser mounted on to an unmanned drone that could cause "instantaneous burst-combustion of insurgent clothing, a rapid death through violent trauma, and more probably a morbid combination of both". The request said it should be like "long-range blow torches or precision flame-throwers". They wanted to do with robots things they would find almost unthinkable face-to-face.

While "we" will lose fewer people at first by fighting with warbots, this way of fighting may well catalyse greater attacks on us in the long run. US army staff sergeant Scott Smith boasts warbots create "an almost helpless feeling.... It's total shock and awe." But while terror makes some people shut up, it makes many more furious and determined to strike back.

Imagine if the beaches at Dover and the skies over Westminster were filled with robots controlled from Torah Borah, or Beijing, and could shoot us at any time. Some would scuttle away and many would be determined to kill "their" people in revenge. The Lebanese editor Rami Khouri says that when Lebanon was bombarded by largely unmanned Israeli drones in 2006, it only "enhanced the spirit of defiance" and made more people back Hezbollah.

Is this a rational way to harness our genius for science and spend tens of billions of pounds? The scientists who were essential to developing the nuclear bomb including Albert Einstein, Robert Oppenheimer, and Andrei Sakharov turned on their own creations in horror and begged for them to be outlawed. Some distinguished robotics scientists, like Illah Nourbakhsh, are getting in early, and saying the development of autonomous military robots should be outlawed now.

There are some technologies that are so abhorrent to human beings that we forbid them outright. We have banned war-lasers that permanently blind people along with poison gas. The conveyor belt dragging us ever closer to a world of robot wars can be stopped if we choose to.

All this money and all this effort can be directed towards saving life, not ever-madder ways of taking it. But we have to decide to do it. We have to make the choice to look the warbot in the eye and say, firmly and forever, "Hasta la vista, baby."





Latest Tyranny/Police State
- Cop Stops Fellow Cop From Choking a Handcuffed Man, She Was Then Beaten and Fired
- Thieves Yell "Police" Before Invading Home, Shooting and Robbing Resident
- Cops Called For Wellness Check Beat Innocent Man, Pile On False Charges; Jury Exonerates, Twice
- Psychotic Vegas Cop Filmed Beating Man For Filming In Viral Video Queitly Hired By Another Dept.
- Ignorance Is No Excuse for Wrongdoing, Unless You're a Cop
- The Police Need Competition
- Ontario Cop Sucker-Punched Good Samaritan Grandmother & Broke Her Leg With Karate Kick
- Cop Was Not Fired Despite 75 Counts of Stalking and Harassment -- Now He Just Shot a Mother and Her Daughter









Comments 1 - 9 of 9 Add Comment Page 1 of 1
Andrew Atkin

Posted: Jan 31 2010, 2:17 AM

Link
202180 Any alternative to nuclear, biological or chemical is a good one in my eyes.

Warbots can be abused; okay, but what method can't?

Soldiers can also be reckless from fear. A clinical decision from warbots (remote controlled, and later maybe not remote controlled) has its good points. I am a fan of ever more surgical warfare.

You can design the system so automation (minus remote control) only kicks in after the communication-link is debilitated. That will incentivise people to not debilitate it. The technology can be strategically developed.
elhombremacho

Posted: Jan 31 2010, 3:53 AM

Link
7543 Even if you could make a machine to kill, why would you want to anyway?

Anonymous

Posted: Jan 31 2010, 1:28 PM

Link
8047 it is a sick world when video games become a reality and people think it is a good idea

shame on you fools
Anonymous

Posted: Feb 01 2010, 7:43 AM

Link
2425 well, just think you can destroy a robot or machine....and won't have to hurt anyone else in the process !!! If we all unite together, and if it ever did happen, then I think if we are prepared enough, we could take them out !!!
Anonymous

Posted: Feb 01 2010, 12:44 PM

Link
206173 Make Sex Robots
not
War Robots

Sex robot Roxxxy looking for action
Roxxxy also has sensors on various parts of her 5-foot, 7-inch, 120-pound body and can tell when she's being touched. No word yet on whether nibbling her ear drives the machine wild.
Hines apparently wants to charge $7,000 to $9,000 for Roxxxy and an attached laptop running its software.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-10432597-1.html

Anonymous

Posted: Feb 02 2010, 2:30 AM

Link
1233 it is an interesting thing in that our populace entertains itself playing games that give them strategic skills that have little to no use outside of battle while at the same time technology works to make battle itself more sterile and remote from society.

robotics is only going to get more adept and cheap. infact if you look at the trend and speculation regarding current technology and rate of progress we can see that robotics will sometime within the next decade will overtake all other forms of warfare.

having multiple countries developing better and faster robot armys will only lead to war.

any country that does not develop war robots stands to lose all tactical and strong power available to them.

this does not lead to good things.
Anonymous

Posted: Feb 02 2010, 1:19 PM

Link
7972 This robot technology is not just for the battlefield, but to control and take away people's freedom in civilian life.
Anonymous 4.0

Posted: Feb 03 2010, 12:49 AM

Link
97126 Wow it took me a second but the thought finally caught on. War is used to make profit by many top politicians, company executives, and others. If their soldier assets die too quickly they can't make as much money as they want. a series of perpetual war sgoing on in places around the globe will make it possible to continually rake in large amounts of their own self produced currencies and items of actual value... Dude, these people are totally insane. I don't see a way to stop them, but as soon as the path is lit I'm there.
Felix

Posted: Feb 23 2010, 10:39 PM

Link
12563 What madness is this? How could we have allowed the military industrial complex to get so far out of control.
We sleep while they build machines that will destroy us all, we will pay for our apathy.
Meanwhile they have hidden technology that could free humanity but they have conditioned the sleeping masses to ridicule those who dare to speak out.
There is a universe teeming with intelligent life waiting for us to awaken so we can be accepted into their warless spiritually aware society, yet we allow these monsters to rule our lives and lead us to hell.
WAKE UP!!!!
Comments 1 - 9 of 9 Page 1 of 1


Add Comment
Name
Comment

* No HTML


Verification *
Please Enter the Verification Code Seen Below
 


PLEASE NOTE
Please see our About Page, our Disclaimer, and our Comments Policy.


FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the DMCA and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.

About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



Advanced Search
Username:

Password:

Remember Me
Forgot Password?
Register

Cop Stops Fellow Cop From Choking a Handcuffed Man, She Was Then Beaten and Fired - 12/18Thieves Yell "Police" Before Invading Home, Shooting and Robbing Resident - 12/18Tennessee Town Passes Policy Banning Negative Comments About The Town's Government - 12/18Obama Commutes Sentences for Eight Drug Offenders - 12/18Ontario Cop Sucker-Punched Good Samaritan Grandmother & Broke Her Leg With Karate Kick - 12/17Ignorance Is No Excuse for Wrongdoing, Unless You're a Cop - 12/17Cops Called For Wellness Check Beat Innocent Man, Pile On False Charges; Jury Exonerates, Twice - 12/17Psychotic Vegas Cop Filmed Beating Man For Filming In Viral Video Queitly Hired By Another Dept. - 12/17

Rialto, CA Police Made to Wear Cameras, Use of Force Drops by Over Two-ThirdsCop Who Karate Chopped NY Judge In Throat Gets Off Scot-FreeFlorida Cop Smashes Compliant Woman's Face Into Car -- "Maybe Now You Can Understand Simple Instructions"VIDEO: Lapel Cam Reveals A Day In The Life Of A U.S. Police Officer (Tasing, Beating, Breaking & Entering, Stomping On Heads... and Laughing About It)Caught On Tape: Officer Sucker Punches Inmate In Face, Files Report Claiming 'Self Defense'Insult Person On Twitter, Go To JailSWAT Team Brings TV Crew To Film Raid Against Threatening Internet Critic -- Raids Innocent Grandma InsteadCop Karate Chops NY Judge In The Throat
(more)

 
Top