If the police can do it, so should private citizens. If not, then neither the police should do it.
This simple calculus needs to be the basis of police armament generally, not just robotics.
Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones
41–50 of 145 posts
Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones
#42Sorry to be a downer but it will happen if it hasn't already, and the biggest reason is cost savings which is pretty hard to argue against when the budget is up for discussion at the local gov. Having drones patrol large areas, running plates and face-matching against a warrant database is much quicker and cheaper than having people doing it. They're also cheaper than helicopters to follow fleeing suspects, and a bit…
I have no problem with any of this, and I'm a full-blown police abolitionist. I love drones and their potential for public safety assurances.
However, it's a completely different discussion when we talk about arming them.
Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
The primary purpose of that shotgun is IED/UXO disruption, ostensibly. It's unfortunate that the robots have been used as weapons, and that people aren't in prison for it. But I think arming AI-equipped drones specifically to kill is a much more worrisome threat.
I mean, I get that some jargon is clear to those who have an interest in the topic. But how the hell is it acceptable to use sth like "IED/UXO" on an article about ethics? This is so obviously not a well known term (and not searchable). My mind boggles.
I'm guessing you're not in the US (or UK) where IED and PTSD acronyms have been used so much in the context of physical and psychological injury in the Middle East tha they are pop culture hard to avoid knowing. Certainly, in the US, the first term that pops up in a search for IED is:
IED
/ˌīēˈdē/
noun: a simple bomb made and used by unofficial or unauthorized forces.
Danger UXB (UneXplodedBomb) was a popular British drama 30+ years ago.
Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones
#44We shouldn't allow anyone to do this, not just the police. Although it already happens, and the American military already does this internationally. Drone attacks flourished under Obama's administration basically, look up the incident around 2013 when US military drone fired at a wedding convoy in Yemen and killed 10+ people.
Hey, officer, send this guy to do drone job manually.
Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones
#45> But police technologies malfunction all the time. > When, inevitably, a robot unjustifiably injures or kills someone--who would be held responsible? That Robocop scene where ED209 kills that poor executive used to be a joke. Though now that I think of it, Paul Verhoeven was probably serious. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5NAswnEewg
It is a perfect moment since you can see the low level people panicking while the true bosses are like "ugh, this is going be so annoying to fix", completely uncaring about murdering someone.
What a wonderful glimpse into corporate soul.
Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones
#46Here's the "problem": on a worldwide level there are bad actors who will for sure deploy armed robots. Period.
So, do we (we = any country in the world) want to be ahead of this technology or behind? Leading or lagging?
Because the leaders will have the power to overthrow the laggards, and if history has served us as a teacher, if it MIGH happen (capability) it WILL happen.
Add to the mix overpopulation and the related scarcity of resourced (e.g.: water, protein rich food) and now we have an interesting GLOBAL Game Theory case.
Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones
#47They're about 30 years too late on this one. Police and the FBI have been using EOD robots with shotguns for a long time now and have even killed a few people with them. In a hostage situation or standoff, they'll send in the robot with food or a phone hanging from the arm, which has a Remington semi-automatic shotgun attached to the base. Ruby Ridge is one of the more famous examples.
Never too late to change how things are done.
Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones
#48Here's the "problem": on a worldwide level there are bad actors who will for sure deploy armed robots. Period. So, do we (we = any country in the world) want to be ahead of this technology or behind? Leading or lagging? Because the leaders will have the power to overthrow the laggards, and if history has served us as a teacher, if it MIGH happen (capability) it WILL happen. Add to the mix overpopulation and the relat…
There must not be a mine shaft gap!
Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones
#49I’m less worried about the police doing this than I am rogue nation, groups, and individuals. It’s only a matter of time until Hamas launches an armed, low flying, autonomous drone swarm in the heart of Tel Aviv. The book “Kill Decision” by Daniel Suarez convinced me that we have less to fear from government and more to fear from private actors when it comes to lethal drones. Actually, I’m really surprised it hasn’t…
I like this example, the Slaughterbots: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HipTO_7mUOw
Re: Don’t Let Police Arm Autonomous or Remote-Controlled Robots and Drones
#50Here's the "problem": on a worldwide level there are bad actors who will for sure deploy armed robots. Period. So, do we (we = any country in the world) want to be ahead of this technology or behind? Leading or lagging? Because the leaders will have the power to overthrow the laggards, and if history has served us as a teacher, if it MIGH happen (capability) it WILL happen. Add to the mix overpopulation and the relat…
Other people may do bad things, let's... beat them to it?