21-02-2012, 03:02 AM
Peter Lemkin Wrote:I fail to see how blame is less if a killer drone or spy drone is controlled by thoughts or one's hand. Control is control. What is really frightening are the development of autonomous drones - believed to already exist or just months away. Then you have to blame the programmer[s] if anyone by Military/Intel. 'logic'. With a fair legal system [the USA NO LONGER HAS ONE!] any of the above could be prosecuted at the highest levels for deciding to build, building, funding and allowing building-funding-use of such vehicles!!!! Sadly, in our current 'system' might [and money] make 'right' or immunity from crimes or being persecuted for crimes - no matter how large they be.
I share your concerns about the law of the new level of existence now well underway, the issues of artificial intelligence, human intelligence, the ability to discern and discriminate (and I mean that term in its best cognitive use).
I recently posted an old nine-part series coming out of my archives on the topics of attention and focus that starts here: http://summonthemagic.blogspot.com/2012/...-nine.html . If a nervous system must always be on the lookout for the most important activities to which to devote itself (the ultimate purpose of emotion), then an A.I.-driven drone -- which is by definition emotionless and non-human) has lot of learning to do to be able to discriminate high-altitude flock-watchers from terrorists or enemies or anything short of a human need finding its Maslovian flow among quadrapeds.
The vast majority of humans don't use their minds to anything near their capacities, and fail to understand the internal interaction of senses, hormones and synapses (or its implications) in decision-making. How can we expect a crude robotic airplane fitted with a complex string of 0's and 1's to do better? Could a drone pass this test? http://viscog.beckman.illinois.edu/grafs/demos/15.html
"Where is the intersection between the world's deep hunger and your deep gladness?"