Why robots should not be delegated with the decision to kill

NOEL E. SHARKEY

19 citations0/0 files storedConnection Science

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Ethics and Social Impacts of AI Military Strategy and Technology War, Ethics, and Justification

Abstract

The EPSRC first principle of robotics, “robots should not be designed solely or primarily to kill or harm humans, except in the interests of national security”, is challenged in detail here. Focusing on security and armed conflict, arguments are marshalled against the principle on ethical, legal, technical and security grounds. A new principle is proposed that robots should never be delegated with the decision to apply violent force to humans.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 19 citations exist upstream.

References

2008Interpretive Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities under International Humanitarian Law 2009Governing Lethal Behavior in Autonomous Robots 2012On banning autonomous weapon systems: human rights, automation, and the dehumanization of lethal decision-making 2010Governing Lethal Behavior in Autonomous Robots 2010Saying ‘No!’ to Lethal Autonomous Targeting 2012The evitability of autonomous robot warfare 2016Autonomous Weapons Systems: Law, Ethics, Policy 1920On banning autonomous weapons systems: from deontological to wide consequentialist reasons

Cited by

2020Operations of power in autonomous weapon systems: ethical conditions and socio-political prospects

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.