The Robot Army Hypothesis -- A.I And Ethics In The Military

(Background music)

(Philosocom's Subcategory on A.I)

(Philosocom's Subcategory on Military and Combat)

As we may either admire or despise the A.I revolution, as presented in writing, art and so on, we need to consider its potential for the long-run. A potential that can threaten humanity as a whole, should it be placed in the wrong hands.

When it comes to military, we as humanity have yet to develop fully-autonomous war machines, even though we're doing quite well in the field of Air-dynamics. Although we have yet to invent a fully autonomous, human-independent airborne drone, some machinery only requires minimal input on our end. We may call these planes "drones" but please remember that a drone is far more general.

• The term "drone" originally referred to a male bee whose purpose is to impregnate the queen bee.

  
  

• An "office drone" is a derogatory term for a monotonous white-collar office worker.

  
  

• A.I can be used in menial jobs as well (If you happen to work in Amazon, or know someone who does, you might already know that, too).

Robotic soldiers are a real possibility for the future. The fact that most of them are currently airborne and semi-autonomous does not limit this potential. We need to understand that artificial intelligence (AI) has far greater potential than mere artists or language models. It can be implemented into a robotic body, and can follow orders blindly.

AI-powered robots can be more competent, more durable, and carry out orders without question.

• Being an excellent soldier, however does not make one an excellent person.

  
  

• In fact, there is no correlation between the two.

  
  

• For example, deserting a morally depraved military force is the moral thing to do.

It might be far more appealing for a military leader, such as a warlord or a military contractor, to employ robotic troops for their cause. This would mean that smaller, rogue military factions around the world could be far more powerful than they currently are. They would have greater advantages over their enemies, be able to overthrow one or more governments, and perhaps, be competent enough to even challenge more powerful countries.

Yes, warlords exist today, as well as military contractors. The latter are essentially private military companies. This external article is an example for contemporary warlords. (AKA, powerful people, military and politically-wise, without relation to a strong, national government).

I would advise against even considering developing killer robot armies.

• Robots are incapable of the moral values that many humans possess, unless those values are explicitly programmed into them.

  
  

• That is while humans, at large, may have varying degrees of moral intelligence.

Furthermore, their programming can be hacked and changed, just like with a computer. Such a thing could have drastic measures during an armed military conflict. It's not something you can do with humans (beyond convincing them otherwise, increasing or decreasing their loyalty).

Now, empathy is not only a capability, but also a moral restraint. If we never implement any empathy in a robot soldier, they could be even deadlier than a psychopathic human soldier.

If we create a mechanical being without any empathy, it will obey us without question AND without consideration for the sanctity of human life. It will not hesitate to kill our enemies, because it does not have to be programmed with mercy or compassion.

Thus, as a hypothetical warlord, the fate of countless can be in your hands. Furthermore, that fate can be hijacked by hackers. Like with many pieces of technology, we should make sure that such a technological advancement shall NOT fall in the wrong hands.