Robot evolution

http://humanrobotinteraction.org/2013/

HRI 2013 is the 8th Annual Conference for basic and applied human-robot interaction research. Scientists from across the world submit their best work and attend HRI to hear the latest theories, data, and videos from the world’s best HRI researchers.
Each year, the HRI conference highlights a particular area. HRI 2013 is devoted to exploring the theme of Holistic Human-Robot development. Robotic solutions are increasingly applied to real world problems such as our aging society, renewable energy, climate control, emergency response, education and exploration. These societal problems require a holistic approach to the design and development of robots that meet human needs, address technical challenges, and foster acceptance in everyday settings.
 
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21623892

This one is better with a very interesting EU survey. I already have a NannyBot in a WIP and a NurseBot (granted, a little mad, but a great host for a game show!) and I'd see these as more likley in the future. This is because of an aging population, we'll need more help later, or so I think.
 
With June only 80 minutes away, here's the Robot news for the month of May:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22712752

So-called killer robots are due to be discussed at the UN Human Rights Council, meeting in Geneva.

A report presented to the meeting will call for a moratorium on their use while the ethical questions they raise are debated.

The robots are machines programmed in advance to take out people or targets, which - unlike drones - operate autonomously on the battlefield.

They are being developed by the US, UK and Israel, but have not yet been used.

Supporters say the "lethal autonomous robots", as they are technically known, could save lives, by reducing the number of soldiers on the battlefield.

But human rights groups argue they raise serious moral questions about how we wage war, reports the BBC's Imogen Foulkes in Geneva.

They include: Who takes the final decision to kill? Can a robot really distinguish between a military target and civilians?

If there are serious civilian casualties, they ask, who is to be held responsible? After all, a robot cannot be prosecuted for a war crime.

"The traditional approach is that there is a warrior, and there is a weapon," says Christof Heyns, the UN expert examining their use, "but what we now see is that the weapon becomes the warrior, the weapon takes the decision itself."

The moratorium called for by the UN report is not the complete ban human rights groups want, but it will give time to answer some of those questions, our correspondent says.
 
I remember reading about this.

I agree that there's a substantial difference between drones and autonomous robots. I'm sure the research will continue, but it'd be a bad situation, I think, if we had autonomous robots carrying out programmed instructions without any input from a chap at a computer.
 
It's not countries like the UK etc that worry me, but poorer countries.

I also think that the technology is not ready yet, as in, it's not cheap enough just yet. But this won't last. To train one soldier costs, and humans have a short shelf live - a few years fighting at most. Just imagine robot guards on your borders, they never sleep, never tire or get bored. The first world countries can discuss ethics all they like, but a nasty dictatorship won't care. We'll see fighting robots at some time, and once that pandora box has been opened, well, that will be it I think.
 
Yeah, that's a serious issue. Reminds me of landmines. Almost all the countries who sign up to anti-mine treaties wouldn't use them in the first place, and those who don't sign just ignore it.

Not to say we shouldn't try and do things about mines, clusterbombs and autonomous killer robots, of course, just that it isn't easy.
 

Similar threads


Back
Top