INDUSTRIAL CHALLENGES OF MILITARY ROBOTICS

This article evaluates the 'drive toward greater autonomy' in lethally-armed unmanned systems. Following a summary of the main criticisms and challenges to lethal autonomy, both engineering and ethical, raised by opponents of this effort, the article turns toward solutions or responses tha...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of military ethics 2011-12, Vol.10 (4), p.274-295
Main Author: Lucas, George R.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accidents
accountability
Arkin test
Autonomy
Defense industry
due care
Due diligence
Engineering
Ethics
Guided missiles
Industry
International law
laws of armed conflict (LOAC)
lethal autonomous systems
lethality
liability
Manufacturing
Military policy
military robotics
precautionary principle
Products liability
reckless endangerment
Responsibility
Robotics
Robots
Turing test
Unmanned aerial vehicles
War
War crimes
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This article evaluates the 'drive toward greater autonomy' in lethally-armed unmanned systems. Following a summary of the main criticisms and challenges to lethal autonomy, both engineering and ethical, raised by opponents of this effort, the article turns toward solutions or responses that defense industries and military end users might seek to incorporate in design, testing and manufacturing to address these concerns. The way forward encompasses a two-fold testing procedure for reliability incorporating empirical, quantitative benchmarks of performance in compliance with formalized and programmable rules of engagement, and a conception of 'due care' in product liability. This would be designed in analogy with procedures currently followed by well-intentioned governments and militaries with their own (human) military personnel, both to ensure against failure, and to accept responsibility and compensate victims of inadvertent and unintended accidents. The procedure is designed specifically to address objections first posed by Robert Sparrow (2007) and Noel Sharkey (2007), and echoed in P.W. Singer's critically acclaimed Wired for War (2009), that lethal autonomous systems cannot be meaningfully held accountable for commission of war crimes, and thus the development, manufacture, and deployment of such systems would constitute a violation of international law.
ISSN:1502-7570
1502-7589
DOI:10.1080/15027570.2011.639164