Skynet became self aware at 2:14 am EDT
This is a GDF Mark V twin 35 mm cannon manufactured by Oerlikon Contraves, a division of Rheinmettal AG.
A number of months ago, the South African National Defence Force ran in to some serious problems when a computer controlled upgraded version of the gun went "beserk" firing uncontrollably. When the smoke cleared nine soldiers were dead and fourteen other soldiers were wounded.
Inquiries have been underway for months into the cause of the malfunction that claimed so many lives. Debate raged over whether it was a mechanical malfunction or a computer glitch. Oerlikon executives claimed the gun was not designed for fully automated control and that the systems upgrade had occured without their intervention. The debate was settled (maybe) a few days ago with the issuance of a report by the SA Defence Force and the SA Police. Some unfortunate humans are going to be blamed and a "full inquest" is on its way.
Whether or not it was computer, man or steel at fault, does it not give a South Africa Defence Force recruit pause as the South African's embark on a massive air defence upgrade (Projects Guardian and Protector) that will include computer controlled firing systems? The whole episode reminds me of Terminator Two: "The Skynet Funding Bill is passed. The system goes online August 4th, 1997......It becomes self-aware at 2:14 am Eastern time, August 29th."
First, SA needs air defense? Second, I wonder if this was their "Beta" test?
Anyways, I hope the US military contractors conduct more stringent tests of computer code than the South African military. I would hate to be in that "Lessons Learned" meeting though, since no one in the field knew what the gun's requirements were, or how the design supported those requirements.
Reply to this
That is indeed a good question. Threat from the air?
Thanks for the post.
Warren
Reply to this
Oddly appropriate that this was posted to slashdot today.
http://www.cc.gatech.edu/ai/robot-lab/online-publications/formalizationv35.pdf
A 117 page paper rules for autonomous systems in war. A little light reading for you.
From the abstract:
"This report has provided the motivation, philosophy, formalisms, representational requirements, architectural design criteria, recommendations, and test scenarios to design and construct an autonomous robotic system architecture capable of the ethical use of lethal force. "
Reply to this
The subtitle is so catchy: Embedding Ethics in a Hybrid Deliberative/Reactive Robot Architecture
I will enjoy the read although I am predisposed to believe that robots and lethal force decisions are not a natural fit.
Appreciate your contribution of this link. I plan to blog more on robots.
Warren
Reply to this
"Ethical use of lethal force" is something that humans have yet to agree on...
I wonder where this programming will come from...Aristotle, religious teachings or left up the autonomous robotic system to determine for itself?
Reply to this
I have some pretty clear ideas of ethical use but you are right, they are not universally agreed upon. The robots of course will be imprinted with the ethical values of their masters. Good master equals good robots (except when they malfunction.) Bad masters.. Well you get the point.
Reply to this