Pentagon: A Human Will Always Decide When a Robot Kills You

First Reaper The Pentagon wants to make perfectly clear that every time one of its flying robots releases its lethal payload, it’s the result of a decision made by an accountable human being in a lawful chain of command. Human rights groups and nervous citizens fear that technological advances in autonomy will slowly lead to the day when robots make that critical decision for themselves. But according to a new policy directive issued by a top Pentagon official, there shall be no SkyNet, thank you very much. Twitter.

Here’s what happened while you were preparing for Thanksgiving: Deputy Defense Secretary Ashton Carter signed, on November 21, a series of instructions to “minimize the probability and consequences of failures” in autonomous or semi-autonomous armed robots “that could lead to unintended engagements,” starting at the design stage (.pdf, thanks to Cryptome.org). Translated from the bureaucrat, the Pentagon wants to make sure that there isn’t a circumstance when one of the military’s many Predators, Reapers, drone-like missiles or other deadly robots effectively automatizes the decision to harm a human being.

The hardware and software controlling a deadly robot needs to come equipped with “safeties, anti-tamper mechanisms, and information assurance.” The design has got to have proper “human-machine interfaces and controls.” And, above all, it has to operate “consistent with commander and operator intentions and, if unable to do so, terminate engagements or seek additional human operator input before continuing the engagement.” If not, the Pentagon isn’t going to buy it or use it.

It’s reasonable to worry that advancements in robot autonomy are going to slowly push flesh-and-blood troops out of the role of deciding who to kill. To be sure, military autonomous systems aren’t nearly there yet. No Predator, for instance, can fire its Hellfire missile without a human directing it. But the military is wading its toe into murkier ethical and operational waters: The Navy’s experimental X-47B prototype will soon be able to land on an aircraft carrier with the barest of human directions. That’s still a long way from deciding on its own to release its weapons. But this is how a very deadly slope can slip.

It’s that sort of thing that worries Human Rights Watch, for instance. Last week, the organization, among the most influential non-governmental institutions in the world, issued a report warning that new developments in drone autonomy represented the demise of established “legal and non-legal checks on the killing of civilians.” Its solution: “prohibit the “development, production, and use of fully autonomous weapons through an international legally binding instrument.”

Laudable impulse, wrong solution, writes Matthew Waxman. A former Defense Department official for detainee policy, Waxman and co-author Kenneth Anderson observe that technological advancements in robotic weapons autonomy is far from predictable, and the definition of “autonomy” is murky enough to make it unwise to tell the world that it has to curtail those advancements at an arbitrary point. Better, they write, for the U.S. to start an international conversation about how much autonomy on a killer robot is appropriate, so as to “embed evolving internal state standards into incrementally advancing automation.”

Test Post

Just when you thought Fox News couldn’t get any better, they go and publish an insane op-ed called “The War On Men” (Really babe? A war? Like with real guns and stuff? Or just with angry women yielding tampons?) that makes you smack your forehead in delightful frustration. After publishing this piece, I’m sure everyone at Fox News did a happy jig and yelled, “YEAH, BITCH. WE STILL GOT IT!!! Who wants to go to Guy Fieri’s new restaurant in Times Square to celebrate the imminent page views?”

Writer Al Bundy, oops I mean Suzanne Venker, posits that modern women are having trouble finding a dude to marry them these days because, um, they’re not women anymore! What do you mean, Suzanne? Are you inferring that women have somehow lost their vaginas during the commute to their high-powered jobs?  According to Venker, women are now being raised with a certain level of hostility towards men and that needs to stop ASAPular! She also says that men don’t want to compete with women. They just want to go to work and provide for them in exchange for some home cooked meals and late night back tickles. WHY, OH WHY, CAN’T WOMEN JUST LET THEM DO THAT? STOP WORKING AND WANTING TO DO THINGS WITH YOUR LIVES. Don’t they realize that they’re just making it that much harder for themselves? After all, who’s going to want to marry a chick with a 401k? Dealbreaker!