Military Turing test to make autonomous war robots legal?

Not that we're experts on the matter or anything, but if barrister and engineer Chris Elliot knows a thing or two about legal issues, a kind of "military Turing test" could be the key to legally deploying autonomous systems in battle. As it stands, "weapons intrinsically incapable of distinguishing between civilian and military targets are illegal" -- at least according to Mr. Elliot -- but by testing an intelligent war machine's ability to hone in on legitimate targets and brush off friendlies, all that could change. Of course, actually administering the test still remains a mystery, but considering that remotely controlled armed bots are currently being used in Iraq, we reckon someone's already figuring out a solution to said dilemma.

[cirian1975 @ Feb 29th 2008 9:23AM]

Ermmmmm.


That robo looks quite lethal :-(

Twin Drum fed MP5 SMG's

Start running now!!!

[Dustin @ Feb 29th 2008 9:31AM]

They're not MP5's. Try the AA12 Automatic Shotgun—watch your face...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atchisson_Assault_Shotgun

[Austin @ Feb 29th 2008 9:31AM]

That's actually a new prototype weapon called the AA-12- it's a fully automatic, almost recoilless shotgun. Wouldn't want to be in the way of that one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhstuvzMiB0

[Zeus.:God @ Feb 29th 2008 10:09AM]

Pretty sure it's not a prototype anymore...

[fanman @ Feb 29th 2008 10:11AM]

It has I Robot written on it. Facetious, much?

[Boostjunkie @ Feb 29th 2008 10:55AM]

Put the vacuum on the bottom of it and I'm buying one.

[Mike G @ Feb 29th 2008 11:04AM]

iRobot - the same company that builds robots to clean your house also builds robots for military uses.

Once they have a civilian version of this - probably in Hello Kitty pink (http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/17/hello-kitty-ar-15-assault-rifle-makes-you-wish-it-was-photoshopp/) - expect to see them trundling around the Arizona State campus http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0216guns0216.html

[JS Beckerist @ Feb 29th 2008 11:35AM]

Ironically that's the exact gun I'm working on getting 150 kills with in COD4 right now (MP5)

[thenino85 @ Feb 29th 2008 9:23AM]

The Turing test is far from scientific law. There are a ton of legitimate counterarguments to it, some of which were provided by Turing himself. This is not a good idea.

[gmf @ Feb 29th 2008 10:00AM]

"As it stands, 'weapons intrinsically incapable of distinguishing between civilian and military targets are illegal'"

As it stands, torture's illegal too....and, well....you know....

(just sayin')

[Jamie @ Feb 29th 2008 9:26AM]

I for one welcome our disturbingly ED-209-like overlords.

The army has obviously never watched RoboCop.

[TrentD @ Feb 29th 2008 10:24AM]

Are you kidding? This is a SkyNet minion, all the way.

[Jeebus @ Feb 29th 2008 12:10PM]

Don't you mean "The army has obviously closely watched RoboCop"?

[Jamie @ Mar 1st 2008 11:56AM]

You're right. Here I was thinking that the army can tell the difference between a good idea and a bad one. Maybe they should watch some Animaniacs instead.

[Gimpols1908 @ Mar 3rd 2008 1:43PM]

It is kind of cute in a 'I'm going to blow your face off' way.

[bob sakamano @ Feb 29th 2008 9:27AM]

Wall-E Part 2: The Rise of the Machines

[Mallard Duck @ Feb 29th 2008 9:35AM]

Let's see an autonomous machine tell the difference between a human and a mannequin, especially in, say, a smokey environment.

New produict!

Think this thing can see from its side? Couple diversionary tactics, good rifle, dead machine.

[Eric @ Feb 29th 2008 9:49AM]

Easy: thermal motion sensor

[Flashpoint @ Feb 29th 2008 9:53AM]

A Robot COULD tell the difference between a Manequin and a Human being...

its called an INFRA RED SENSOR.

A robot could also have night vision, magnetic resonance imaging and microwave vision.

A robot could determine the threat level of a "weapon" before shooting much faster than a human could. This way, it could tell the difference between a kid holding a watergun and a kid holding an AK-47 (note to parents, if your kid has an AK 47, he is gonna get LIT UP...that is unless the robot has "targeting denied" programming to prevent it from shooting targets shorter than 5'5)

[Humans Rule @ Feb 29th 2008 10:03AM]

So train dogs to run up to robots.

Boom.

Dead machine.

Oh!

Robots know dogs!

Okay...cats.

Oh!

Robots know cats!

Okay, pigeons.

Oh!

Dead machine.

[emailtabs @ Feb 29th 2008 10:16AM]

Sweet!, i'm 5'4" so it looks like i'm going on a rampage when these things come out.

[Chris in CA @ Feb 29th 2008 2:13PM]

If they go bad, we just have to get them into space, then we can shoot them all down with SM-3s. Seriously, what are you guys worried about?

[Jamie @ Mar 1st 2008 12:00PM]

Do robots know midgets? I think there's a serious loophole here. Midget soldiers will be the way to go. All they'll have to do is paint the tips of their guns bright red.

[John Johnson @ Feb 29th 2008 9:38AM]

Remember that invisible border post not so long ago?

Robot: "Green card"
Border Jumper: "No habla"
Robot: *pop* *pop* *pop* *pop* *pop* *pop* *click* *click*

[r3loaded @ Feb 29th 2008 10:04AM]

What truly worries me is that the US government will take your humor seriously

[Eli 05 @ Feb 29th 2008 12:49PM]

That invisible border post made me think of that online hunting story a few months back. I thought why don't they just combine the two. Maybe we could have Call of Duty 5 Border Patrol. Instead of paying billions for a invisible fence that doesn't work have online hunting. The system would pay for itself in no time.

[RadicalxEdward @ Mar 28th 2008 1:33PM]

@eli 05

So what about all the frickin team killers?

[Only morons take this seriously. @ Feb 29th 2008 9:38AM]

Someone needs to read Screamers by Philip K Dick before letting robots fight the wars.

[zorg @ Feb 29th 2008 9:47AM]

"Anything that moves is VC; anything that doesn't move is well-disciplined VC!"

- Full Metal Jacket

[squished18 @ Feb 29th 2008 9:48AM]

It seems to me that some human combatants in the modern field of war would fail this test.

[Flashpoint @ Feb 29th 2008 9:50AM]

I like automated robotic sentries because someday they will be able to kill without fear and without malice.
You can't accuse a robot of being a racist.

That is... unless robots become self aware and decide that humanity is beneath them.

[mr friggles @ Feb 29th 2008 11:09AM]

And without a conscience. May you fall heard-on into a wood chipper.

[Gleidus @ Feb 29th 2008 10:01AM]

You know what I see in the future? "Dude don't taze me, taze-bot!" There is no reasoning with Taze-Bot.

[Brent @ Feb 29th 2008 10:34AM]

Ha, I was going to make the same reference, but I was going to go with "Dude, don't taze me robro!"

[insertAlias @ Feb 29th 2008 10:42AM]

I'd like to taze you both right now.

[Timmy @ Feb 29th 2008 5:18PM]

or dont taze me Bro-bot

[Ray @ Feb 29th 2008 10:44AM]

Judgment Day will soon come when SkyNet takes over.

[CosterMonger @ Feb 29th 2008 10:56AM]

And here I thought: the next-gen Elmos are going to exterminate humanity.

[kevin @ Feb 29th 2008 10:16AM]

So in the future the country with the best robots wins the wars....

Start studying your Japanese.

[ugg.tryptophan @ Feb 29th 2008 1:04PM]

sweet, all my years of mechassault will pay off in the future of warfare

[wzcx @ Mar 28th 2008 1:41PM]

Why bother learning japanese? Telling an evangelion to stop won't do much.

[Ralph @ Feb 29th 2008 10:22AM]

(apologies to bob s above)

Wall*E, noooooo!

I mean, Number 5, noooooo!

I mean, Artoo, put your clothes back on.

[BruceB @ Feb 29th 2008 10:25AM]

Chris Elliot a.k.a Cabin Boy?

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2187630848/tt0109361

[jimmyfinch @ Feb 29th 2008 8:39PM]

Man, oh man, I hate those fancy lads!

[emailtabs @ Feb 29th 2008 10:26AM]

It doesn't look too big, have they thought about the stair issues?.
Plus can the guns move up and down as otherwised a big rock would get in its line of sight.

Who designed this? wonder how much it cost them to strap a pair of guns to a set of treads. (personally i reckon it was last years scrapheap challenge winners)

[holastefan @ Mar 1st 2008 8:33AM]

I agree with emailtabs. I mean seriously, it sure looks like a Logitech webcam that's duct-taped to the front of the thing. Gee, I sure hope no insurgents know how to unplug a USB cable.

[Zane @ Feb 29th 2008 4:33PM]

Given the civilian deaths in Iraq...you'd have to wonder about the distinction you introduce in the 2nd paragraph.

[CosterMonger @ Feb 29th 2008 10:46AM]

*uggh!?*... but... I... was holding... a... cameraaaaaaa....?

[Chris @ Feb 29th 2008 11:45AM]

Autonomous killing machines may be considered illegal, but a "remote control" killing machine is NOT autonomous. Not saying either is a good thing, just clearing up some confusion in the post. It seems to be suggesting somebody's decided it is legal, or to ignore the fact that it isn't. "Remote control" and "autonomous" are very different things.

[mr friggles @ Feb 29th 2008 11:04AM]

Hey enblahget, autonomous robots WILL STILL BE ILLEGAL regardless of this "turning test". Even a 12 year old can figure out the reason why these robots are illegal is because they can't distinguish between a 2month old and an old lady, not because of friendly fire.

Sending this into a warzone where there are civilians would clearly constitute a war crime. It would be like sending a group of solders into an area knowing they will kill every living thing thats not a home solider.

Please find better writers/editors because the quality is on this site is starting to take a nose dive.