Should machines fight armed conflicts for us?

File: nuremburg-damage.jpg (86KB, 1200x965px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1200x965px

>>34023586

A machine will reach the same logical conclusion

Who gives a fuck?

Well that's where it's heading Anon, whatever keeps our boys out of the body bags is going to bet he solution.

>>34023586
Machines, be they smart or not, are still just tools.
We could use them, provided that we don't give them the capacity to be supply independant from humans.

Automating specific plateforms is fine.
Automating the whole military is full of liabilities.

>>34023586
Always a human operator with a killswitch, and a failsafe system that requires positive confirmation to kill, so that a human is always pulling the trugger

>>34023586
>Let's go 100, maybe 150 years into the future.
More like 10/15 years.
It's already the case in economics, algorithms take decisions on the market places, and these decisions have a huge impact on human life, possibly creating conflicts.
The moral question is already outdated, AI taking decisions on the battlefield is the necessary next step.

>>34023586
>Should we use those machines decide who lives and who dies?

absolutely not

arent drones strikes planned out to factor in the least number of innocent casualties?

how would a machine differentiate between a terrorist group in hiding and a family?

>artifical intelligence

It bothers me how much people misuse this word. At most you are talking virtual intelligence. Artifical intelligence is an entity capible of feeling sadness, compassion, love, fear, hate, anger, and self preservation, what some would even consider a "soul".

>>34023860
And to answer your question, as soon as the singularity happens and AI exists, we no longer have the power to make that decision.

>>34023586
Yes but war should be held like sport in giant arenas, with nations fielding giant robots.