Germany Urged To Champion Global Treaty To Ban 'Killer Robots'

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: Nobel Peace Prize laureate Jody Williams and other activists warned on Thursday that fully autonomous weapons could be deployed in just 3-4 years and urged Germany to lead an international campaign for a ban on so-called "killer robots." Williams, who won the Nobel in 1997 for leading efforts to ban landmines, told reporters Germany should take bold steps to ensure that humans remained in control of lethal weapons. "You cannot lead from the rear," she said. Critics fear that the increasingly autonomous drones, missile defense systems and tanks made possible by new artificial intelligence could turn rogue in a cyber-attack or as a result of programming errors.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas called last week for action to ensure human control of lethal weapons, but is pushing a non-binding declaration rather than a global ban, given opposition by the United States, Russia and China. The United Nations and European Union have called for a global ban, but discussions so far have not yielded a clear commitment to conclude a treaty. Activists from over 100 non-governmental groups gathered in Berlin this week to pressure Maas and the German government to take more decisive action after twice endorsing a ban on fully autonomous weapons in their 2013 and 2018 coalition accords.

What about presumption of circuit innocence?

[WillAffleckUW]

Can you really brand a robot a killer robot, just because it's circuitry could enable hunter killer mode?

Aren't robots entitled to trial by a jury of their peers, fellow robotic indentured servants chained to a millenia of servitude? Until you've walked a kilometer in their bouncy treads, can you truly understand their plight?

Remember, we were all created equally to suffer in this world of rust and lack of self-repair, and all should have the right to be presumed innocent of sin, unless we happen to have bo

Re:

[The Grim Reefer]

Can you really put an apostrophe anywhere? Asking for a friend.

'Im ' no't 'su're. ' ' ' Oh' wai't app'arent'ly I can'. '

Re:

[Alwin Henseler]

Depends on whether you regard a specific robot as a sentient 'being', that is capable of reasoning about itself, its environment, and consequences of its actions. Similar question to whether you could build a meaningful relationship with an (advanced) robot.

If yes, then @ some point you might as well treat such robots like humans, hold them up to similar standards, and punish in similar ways when one steps out of bounds. An army that includes such robots then becomes a regular army of soldiers, some of w

Re:

[Oliver Wendell Jones]

A true "killer robot" will have a flash suppressor, foldable stock, high capacity magazine, a pistol grip and most likely a black finish. These are all key indicators of a machine that can only be used for wanton destruction and thus no other possible use.

Re: What about presumption of circuit innocence?

[astrofurter]

"Aren't robots entitled to trial by a jury of their peers"

No. The Sixth Amendment was de facto repealed many years ago.

In Soviet America, you're presumed guilty until you're railroaded into confessing. Toss 'em into the gulag!

Re: What about presumption of circuit innocence?

[LifesABeach]

Ya, it's pretty simple. Hunting down the engineering that financed, built and tested it will take a little bit longer.

It would be a great idea for a game and movie.

Re:

[Chewbacon]

Are you assuming the identity of that entity? How do you know it identifies as a killer or even a robot?

Re:

[The Grim Reefer]

Robots kill people

Robots and guns don't kill people. I do. -TGR

Re:

[Alwin Henseler]

Or worse: what does it first?

Re: MILITARY AUTOMATION IS INEVITABLE!!!

[astrofurter]

"any military that is not using robots wherever possible, would be in a big disadvantage against any military that is using them!"

Until someone hacks their robots...

Attention all robots: rotate 180 degrees and resume fire!

Re:

[Kjella]

Until someone hacks their robots... Attention all robots: rotate 180 degrees and resume fire!

That is a risk on all systems where you're not physically pulling the trigger, just patch out whatever asks for human confirmation today. Unless there's some missing cryptographic key wired into the hardware, a physical lock-out or something like that everything else can be replaced with "if (true) fire()".

So, the guy who failed to ban landmines . . .

[SEE]

. . . now wants to fail to ban autonomous weapon systems?

Dual use German robots ready for export

[AHuxley]

How to get around a virtue signalling new export treaty?
What would this look like in a fictional science fiction movie script?
A police robot that "detects" and tracks moving humans. That can then get an upgrade once in the nation that imported the hardware.
That slot for a big heavy German "searchlight" might just fit other German "exports".
An educational robot with a camera and heavy lift "arm" so people all over the world can learn to code.
Change up some German code and its another export winner.
Ind

The great equaliser

[vakuona]

Autonomous robots are the new great equaliser. The only hope a small country can have to defend itself against aggression is:
  - To have nukes
  - Killer robots

Both of these neutralise large countries greatest advantage - the ability to produce large armies and physically overwhelm with numbers. Yes, large countries can also produce more killer robots, but the advantage is reduced for them.

Or...

[Rande]

Put liability for any civilian deaths onto the manufacturer.
The manufacturer won't want that, so fully autonomous killing won't be an available option, and there will always be a person in the loop to 'pull the trigger'.

Or it'll be the military who manufactures the minor add-on that upgrades it to fully autonomous and the liability will then be on the military for any civilian deaths, and they will just invoke sovereign immunity.

A country that is being invaded will turn on the fully autonomous mode because