Build[ing] robot soldiers that 'won't commit war crimes'

• fatone

  9 Dec 08, 17:34

  
  

• Herzog_Zwei

  9 Dec 08, 17:35

  Originally posted by Stevenson101:

  Eh, so when the robot kills innocent villagers who are just defending their homes who takes responsibility?

  The robot, the officer who gave the order in the first place or the designer?

  
  The villagers. When it's obvious any action of violence even in the act of defence will result in your demise, the person who takes violent action is responsible.

• BadzMaro

  9 Dec 08, 17:36

  

  these guys wont commit war crimes. ;p

• lotus999

  9 Dec 08, 18:52

  my goodness, we human beings have lost so much decency that we need to be replaced by robots?

• freedomclub

  9 Dec 08, 19:09

  Is it so hard to see? With the Revolution in Military Affairs going to the next level, there is a need to protect actual war criminals like Bush, Cheney etc from war crimes charges. After all, Henry Kissinger was brought to court several times over war crime charges. With a robot, the humans can be absolved of the crime of "collateral damage".

  Moreover, it is worthwhile to mention that the spike in EM so-called "non-lethal" weapons are so new that they have not been covered by international human rights treaty. Even though the CIA conducted MKULTRA (the mind-controlling project through drugs) in the 1950s, up till now, cognitive rights are still neglected by the international community. Why is this important? Because EM weapons that can beam voices into your head exists (though only the commercial use is being hyped, not the military one), bringing what constitutes schizophrenia to a whole new level.

  Then there are the microwave weapons that burn the top layer of your skin, upgrading crowd control weapons for the powers that be, helping them better control us sheeple. Although they are labelled "non-lethal" such EM weaponry have already been demonstrated to have lasting effects on the body's nervous system.

  Finally, there is the infamous taser, that is replacing the threatened bullet to achieve compliance. In the US, the taser is supposed to be a less lethal substitute for the gun, but police officers have abused this power and have taken to tasing people just because they fail to comply with their orders. You think the officer may be acting out of line, you get tased anyway and crumble in the face of 50,000 volts of electricity. And the Singapore police force is already toying around with this even though the UN called taser use "torture".

  Always, more power to the government, less power and rights to the sheeple.

• Jianye

  9 Dec 08, 21:59

   

  Well, it is natural for humans wanting to kill each other with better weapons, so no argument here. Terminators, Gundams, etc are all products of humans wanting to kill each other...lol

• freedomclub

  9 Dec 08, 22:04

  But before that, some humans like to own other human beings like resources (human resources) before torturing and killing them.

• Fingolfin_Noldor

  9 Dec 08, 23:22

  So.. who's going to give everyone in the world an IFF? Otherwise, it won't work.