Musk, Hawking, Wozniak and Chomsky hate Tim

[Martinus]

Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking Among Hundreds to Urge Ban on Military Robots

By DANIEL VICTORJULY 27, 2015

Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking, along with hundreds of artificial intelligence researchers and experts, are calling for a worldwide ban on so-called autonomous weapons, warning that they could set off a revolution in weaponry comparable to gunpowder and nuclear arms.

In a letter unveiled as researchers gathered at the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Buenos Aires on Monday, the signatories argued that the deployment of robots capable of killing while untethered to human operators is "feasible within years, not decades." If development is not cut off, it is only a matter of time before the weapons end up in the hands of terrorists and warlords, they said.

Unlike drones, which require a person to remotely pilot the craft and make targeting decisions, the autonomous weapons would search for and engage targets on their own. Unlike nuclear weapons, they could be made with raw materials that all significant military powers could afford and obtain, making them easier to mass-produce, the authors argued.

The weapons could reduce military casualties by keeping human soldiers off battlefields, but they could also lower the threshold for going to battle, the letter said. "If any major military power pushes ahead with A.I. weapon development, a global arms race is virtually inevitable, and the endpoint of this technological trajectory is obvious: autonomous weapons will become the Kalashnikovs of tomorrow," it said.

Mr. Musk, the head of SpaceX, has raised warnings about artificial intelligence before, calling it probably humanity's "biggest existential threat." Mr. Hawking, the physicist, has written that while development of artificial intelligence could be the biggest event in human history, "Unfortunately, it might also be the last."

The letter said artificial intelligence "has great potential to benefit humanity in many ways." Proponents have predicted applications in fighting disease, mitigating poverty and carrying out rescues. An association with weaponry, though, could set off a backlash that curtails its advancement, the authors said.

Other notable signatories to the letter included Steve Wozniak, the co-founder of Apple; Noam Chomsky, the linguist and political philosopher; and Demis Hassabis, the chief executive of the artificial intelligence company Google DeepMind.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/technology/elon-musk-and-stephen-hawking-among-hundreds-to-urge-ban-on-military-robots.html?_r=0

[Monoriu]

How exactly do they plan to ensure that individual countries can't obtain the robots?  If, say, Russia says it will go ahead with development anyway, what can they do?

[Martinus]

How exactly do they plan to ensure that individual countries can't obtain the robots?  If, say, Russia says it will go ahead with development anyway, what can they do?

Probably with a non-proliferation treaty.

[Monoriu]

Probably with a non-proliferation treaty.

And if Russia and China refuse to sign such a treaty?

[Eddie Teach]

Then the US makes more, better killer robots. 

[Josquius]

Artificial stupidity worries me far more than artificial intelligence

[jimmy olsen]

Musk has done so much for my issues that I can look past this.

[Brazen]

Fully-autonomous weapons are already in everyday use. It's the ethics of deliberately using them against humans without a "man in the loop" that's in question. This is known as lethal autonomous robotics. or LARs. Here's an interview I did with a human rights lawyer on the subject.

http://www.army-technology.com/features/featureterminator-on-trial-ethics-lethal-robotics/

[Martinus]

Incidentally, the ethics of a machine making a decision about human life is not limited to automated weapons. Automated cars are another example - let's say you are driving in an automated car and you get two (non automated) cars coming from the other side. One is full of kids, who have a high chance of dying if you hit it, but you also get some chance of surviving; the other is a huge truck which will surely kill you. There is no way to avoid hitting either. Are we happy with your automated car making a decision who to kill (including, yourself)?

[katmai]

Tell all those listed in thread to get in line, Ed and I were here first

[Norgy]

I think Peedy may want to join if it's full-blown Tim-bashing. 

[The Brain]

If Chomsky is against it I'm for it.

[Caliga]

I totally agree with them.  I can't think of any reason we'd want to create a true AI anyway unless we do in fact want to go extinct.  Human minds are pretty awesome.

[The Brain]

Speak for yourself.

[crazy canuck]

Brains aren't too bad either