Autonomous weapons could dehumanize war, Vatican warns UN [CC]


#21

There will never be an end to war.


#22

No, but there once were 200 years without war; I’d settle for that.

ICXC NIKA


#23

Is a human soul truly necessary for accurate recognition though? I know the Archbishop really is in the right. His fear is not imagined because today’s facial recognition is still prone to error. But given the purely objective nature of a person’s face, is it really that impossible to imagine technology that will perfectly scan it and say: “Target identified.”

Then again, that’s human appearance. Analyzing behavior and questioning might be juuuuust a little beyond robot processing. :shrug:

Not to mention playing Good-Cop-Bad-Cop would look a lot less fun. :shrug:


#24

When was this?


#25

The Roman Empire (the Pax Romana).


#26

There will always be murder, thievery, sexual assault, poverty, starvation, child abuse and all other types of injustices. Are we then relieved from taking action against all of those things? Would Jesus say, “there will always be war, do not bother trying to stop it”?


#27

What does the Vatican know about warfare?

A target that would have taken thousands of bombs to destroy due to bad accuracy during World War II can now be destroyed with 1 drone strike. This has potentially saved thousands of lives and contributed to more terrorists being eliminated.

Either one can carpet bomb the place, like the US military did in Tora Bora (killing a huge amount of civilians) or use precision bombing to kill high value targets.


#28

‘Precision bombing’ doesn’t sound so precise when there’s still some people in a target’s immediate vicinity.

Maybe if we’re talking some sort of spider-bot assassin but obviously we’re not in 2100 AD yet. :shrug:


#29

Small UAV’s with sub machine guns are currently in the prototype phase, expect the US military to be using them by the end of this decade. With facial recognition software, such drones could work independently of human input. It would thus not be subject to such things such as human error and fatigue. The AI would probably have a lower margin of error than the average drone pilot.

Here’s a video of the type of drone I’m talking about:

m.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPJMk2fgJU

I actually agree with the Pope that autonomous weapons dehumanise war. There’s nothing human about war to begin with: it kills people, wastes resources, harms the environment, benefits only a few people. However we have to fight in order to eliminate forces that try to take our liberty and the welfare of our citizens. If autonomous weapons can help us achieve that with less bloodshed and deaths, the Vatican should support that.


#30

If any collateral damage makes hitting a target immoral, then war cannot be fought at all.

I mean, all the defenders would have to do is put their military appurtenances next to a school, etc, and then they could not morally be attacked.

A war could not be won fighting under those conditions, and so the just thing would be not to fight.

ICXC NIKA.


#31

How do you take action against war? How do you stop it?


#32

Small UAV’s with sub machine guns are currently in the prototype phase, expect the US military to be using them by the end of this decade. With facial recognition software, such drones could work independently of human input. It would thus not be subject to such things such as human error and fatigue. The AI would probably have a lower margin of error than the average drone pilot.

IE, when these things are used in law enforcement (as they already are or will be), whether someone lives, or has his head reduced to ground beef, will depend on how clean the camera lens is.

I don’t think eliminating the drone-pilots is a good idea, when, after all, they don’t risk their neck, sitting in a trailer in Nevada.

ICXC NIKA.


#33

By biting the bullet and instituting a world government. (I know that that is at least 400 years into the future).

ICXC NIKA


#34

How would you get all the countries to give up their sovereignty and submit to a world government? Do you really think having a world government would end war? What would happen if a country didn’t want to be part of the world government and instead remain sovereign?


#35

What does the Vatican know about warfare?

“The Vatican” has been an international intercessor for centuries. Since the late Roman Empire, in fact. It has a huge historical base in the issues of war.

For that matter, it operated its own sizable country, the Papal States, until 1871, and so had military appurtenances of its own.

ICXC NIKA.


#36

The WG could just fence off their borders and ignore them.

The separate existence of Switzerland in no way weakens the EC.

The need to trade with the WG would lead the “islands of nationalism” to kowtow to it to a minimum extent.

ICXC NIKA.


#37

If everybody knew that the attempt to initiate armed conflict would be sat on hard by the WG, there would be no wars. Pax Romana, the sequel.

ICXC NIKA


#38

Oh, so you would end war by the threat of war. Kinda hypocritical isn’t it? Sounds like there would be a lot of terrorism instead of open armed conflict and anyone who dissented against the world government would be hunted down and killed. Sound about right?

Still doesn’t answer the question of how you are going to get countries to submit to the authority of a world government.

Do you really think a secular world government would be good for the Church?

Pax Romana didn’t last forever.


#39

Oh so you a bunch of countries are going to gang up on some other countries and force them to submit to the world government through threats of cutting them off from trade and resources? Yeah, that’ll work. Sounds like that’s a scenario for war to me.


#40

Human life isn’t going to last forever, yet we still care for our somas.

The Earth will fall into the sun some day, yet we are called to tend to it and its life species.

I think it would be better and more human to sit hard on those wishing to start a conflict than to wait until full-on conflict begins, as we have now. Imagine how few people would have died in Europe had an authority been able to sit on the Nazis in 1923.

It’s no different, really, than using the threat of force by police to deter crime.

ICXC NIKA.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.