Civile.it
/internet
Osservatorio sul diritto e telecomunicazioni informatiche, a cura del dott. V. Spataro dal 1999, documenti.

Il dizionario e' stato letto volte. Scarica l'app da o da



Segui via: Email - Telegram
  Dal 1999   spieghiamo il diritto di internet  Store  Caffe20  Dizionario  App  Video Demo · Accesso · Iscrizioni    
             

  


Sinistro Fantasma: come difendersi

9,90 €       download immediato

adv iusondemand
Armi automatiche 25.09.2017    Pdf    Appunta    Letti    Post successivo  

Armi autonome: UK prende posizione

Il dibattito diventa rovente. Quando l'hardware puo' uccidere a distanza uomini ? Dopo l'ok di un umano. Il famoso bottone. Forse.
"We do not have long to act. Once this Pandora’s box is opened, it will be hard to close."

 

D

Da La Stampa:

“Le leggi umanitarie internazionali regolano a sufficienza la materia; inoltre, tutte le armi dell’esercito britannico saranno sempre sotto il controllo e la supervisione umana”. In ogni caso, aveva specificato il ministero della Difesa, il Regno Unito “non supporterà la messa al bando preventiva di questa forma di armamento”.  

Poi una nota ufficiale : “Il Regno Unito non possiede armi completamente autonome e non ha intenzione di svilupparle; l’autorità, la supervisione e la responsabilità umana sono e saranno sempre garantite”.

Link utili:

- https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/09/drone-robot-military-human-control-uk-ministry-defence-policy

- https://icrac.net/2017/09/autonomous-weapon-systems-and-strategic-stability/

- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/21/britain-will-not-support-pre-emptive-ban-killer-robots-mod-says/

- July 2015, an open letter from artificial-intelligence experts and roboticists

- According to a 2012 Pentagon directive, AWS are weapon systems which,
‘once activated … can select and engage targets without further intervention
by a human operator’.

Take care and follow icrac.net:

"

Building on arguments previously developed for a blog post, ICRAC’s Juergen Altmann and Frank Sauer discuss the strategic implications of autonomy in weapon systems in more depth in a recently published article in Survival. Here’s an excerpt from the introduction:

In July 2015, an open letter from artificial-intelligence experts and roboticists
called for a ban on autonomous weapon systems (AWS), comparing
their revolutionary potential to that of gun powder and nuclear weapons.

According to a 2012 Pentagon directive, AWS are weapon systems which,
‘once activated … can select and engage targets without further intervention
by a human operator’. Proponents of AWS have suggested that they
could offer various benefits, from reducing military expenditure to ringing
in a new era of more humane and less atrocious warfare. By contrast, critics
– some characterising AWS as ‘killer robots’ – expect the accompanying
political, legal and ethical risks to outweigh these benefits, and thus argue
for a preventive prohibition.

AWS are not yet operational, but decades of military research and development,
as well as the growing technological overlap between the rapidly
expanding commercial use of artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics, and
the accelerating ‘spin-in’ of these technologies into the military realm, make
autonomy in weapon systems a possibility for the very near future. Military
programmes adapting key technologies and components for achieving
autonomy in weapon systems, as well as the development of prototypes
and doctrine, are well under way in a number of states.

Accompanying this work is a rapidly expanding body of literature on the
various technical, legal and ethical implications of AWS. However, one particularly
crucial aspect has – with exceptions confirming the rule – received
comparably little systematic attention: the potential impact of autonomous
weapon systems on global peace and strategic stability.
By drawing on Cold War lessons and extrapolating insights from the
current military use of remotely controlled unmanned systems, we argue
that AWS are prone to proliferation and bound to foment an arms race
resulting in increased crisis instability and escalation risks. We conclude
that these strategic risks justify a critical stance towards AWS.

"

25.09.2017 Spataro
Fonte: spataro




Segui le novità in materia di Armi automatiche su Civile.it via Telegram
oppure via email: (gratis Info privacy)



Dossier:



dallo store:
visita lo store

Altro su Armi automatiche:


"Noi abbiamo un mondo solo ma viviamo in mondi diversi" - Brothers in arms, Dire Straits


Spieghiamo contratti, ecommerce, privacy e il diritto di internet su Civile.it dal 1999



Tinyletter - I testi sono degli autori e di IusOnDemand srl p.iva 04446030969 - diritti riservati - Privacy - Cookie - Condizioni d'uso - in