SF oks killer robots for cops

[Orbit]

San Francisco has voted to authorize cops to deploy armed robots to disable or kill suspects. What could possibly go wrong?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/11/30/san-francisco-police-robots-kill/

 

[Aštra’el]

I completely approve… as long as the bots are operating within the law, are targeting criminals, and are not being exploited to target political opposition.

Law enforcement along the west coast could definitely use the upgrade. Let’s hope they don’t get hacked.

 

[Windwalker]

My first thought of course was Robocop, but then Terminator comes to mind as well. What could go wrong indeed.

 

[Windwalker]

I completely approve… as long as the bots are operating within the law, are targeting criminals, and are not being exploited to target political opposition.

Law enforcement along the west coast could definitely use the upgrade. Let’s hope they don’t get hacked…

"target political opposition"? Can guess where your mind is at. People don't need robots to do that. All they need is marching order from Donald Trump. Just grab a hammer, and off they go, just like mindless robots.

 

[Father Heathen]

What's the issue? It's not like they operate via autonomous AI.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

"target political opposition"? Can guess where your mind is at. People don't need robots to do that. All they need is marching order from Donald Trump. Just grab a hammer, and off they go, just like mindless robots.

It is somewhat problematic that large swathes of people in the US don't trust machines to be able to process votes without interference, but there will now be armed and deadly robots put in the field.

It's been obvious for a while that cyber terrorism would replace much 'traditional' violent action in targetting states, at least where there is state sponsorship. But I wonder if there are not now multiple paths opening up for those same cyber-terrorists to also handle the 'violent action's part of things as well.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

What could possibly go wrong?

You would prefer seeing addition lives put at risk?

 

[Secret Chief]

My first thought of course was Robocop, but then Terminator comes to mind as well. What could go wrong indeed.

What, no link? Tut tut.

 

[Orbit]

You would prefer seeing addition lives put at risk?

Did I say that? I think the ethics of this are questionable, though.

 

[Orbit]

What's the issue? It's not like they operate via autonomous AI.

Yet.

 

[fantome profane]

What's the issue? It's not like they operate via autonomous AI.

I picture some kid in a police uniform sitting in a car playing a video game, and real people on the street get shot.

 

[Aštra’el]

"target political opposition"? Can guess where your mind is at. People don't need robots to do that. All they need is marching order from Donald Trump. Just grab a hammer, and off they go, just like mindless robots.

You dare mock the God Emperor’s ability to invigorate His forces?

 

[Father Heathen]

I picture some kid in a police uniform sitting in a car playing a video game, and real people on the street get shot.

It's still on the cops' hands wether they pull the trigger or push a button to make a robot pull the trigger.

 

[Windwalker]

It is somewhat problematic that large swathes of people in the US don't trust machines to be able to process votes without interference, but there will now be armed and deadly robots put in the field.

It's been obvious for a while that cyber terrorism would replace much 'traditional' violent action in targetting states, at least where there is state sponsorship. But I wonder if there are not now multiple paths opening up for those same cyber-terrorists to also handle the 'violent action's part of things as well.

One could argue they can easily do that now. Anything with a computer in it could be hacked and potentially used to kill someone. Hack their pacemaker, for instance. Hijack the computer in a car and have it shut off the steering as they round a corner on a mountain road, or any other James Bond sort of thing.

I was just taken back by how we leap from cops using robots to disarm bad guys, to political assassinations . People don't need robots to do that. Why not just leap to the robots being used to spy on you in your bedroom, or read your thoughts?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You would prefer seeing addition lives put at risk?

Did I say that? I think the ethics of this are questionable, though.

And I think avoiding my question is questionable.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

You would prefer seeing addition lives put at risk?

Just measurement and mitigation of the risks in both doing this, and not doing it.

Most of the literature I'd read in police and legal articles pre-2020 from the USA had very specifically noted that the difference between military or police robots would be around deliberate inclusion of lethal weapons. That has changed, but based on a quick review of the SF situation, it appears to have changed for no clearly mandated reason.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

What's the issue? It's not like they operate via autonomous AI.

Some police robots are semi-autonomous already.

The devil is in the detail. Not suggesting these are, but it would be nice to see restrictions on the combination of autonomy and lethal weapons. Or at least guidelines.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

San Francisco has voted to authorize cops to deploy armed robots to disable or kill suspects. What could possibly go wrong?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/11/30/san-francisco-police-robots-kill/

It brings to mind what went wrong with such a thing in a the real Robocop movie.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

What's the issue? It's not like they operate via autonomous AI.

We can't trust the police as it is without them sending killer robots after us.

 

[Revoltingest]

A 2nd thread about this?
I see potential for this to actually improve things for us civilians.
But we must exercise oversight, lest Ed 209 run amok.