• perestroika@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    The article gives a good overview of the situation. I have only a few things to add.

    • war is a match of game theory (finding moves that harm the opponent) and accelerated evolution of the technology and methods for doing so

    • if a weapon works, choosing not to use it typically increases chance of defeat

    • there is no doubt that autonomous weapons work

    • about the only thing which seems to prevent some weapons (e.g. of mass destruction) from being used in some wars, is threat of being targeted with the same kind, or a large coalition of opponents forming and intervening

    • so, only continued development of international law (collective agreement on behalf of a large coalition of states, representing most of human population) has any chance of restraining use of autonomous weapons

    • sadly, I don’t see states wanting continued development of international law

    • restraining production of autonomous weapons is probably hopeless, a reasonably good competition robot can be weaponized with some success

    So, future will have states threatening each other with swarms of autonomous weapons, and terrorist entitities using them at a smaller scale. Weapons that destroy electronics (EMP, microwave, lasers for frying cameras) will be highly sought after for defense. Air defense and antidrone systems will be much more common than today. At some point in history, there will be a war where a large swarm of autonomous weapons is used for mass destruction (maybe against civilians too). Quite possibly, a response will be given with a different weapon of mass destruction (e.g. nuclear EMP used to disable the swarm). Regulation is unlikely to succceed since states are nowhere near agreement (in fact, fighting new and avoidable wars among each other).