This is the first Law Enforcement Robot casualty, in the United States.
How do you feel about Robotic Law Enforcement Personnel? Is this robot technically just a radio controlled device, not a harbinger of a "Robocop" type future where high-tech law enforcement agents routinely trample human rights? Do you believe that government regulations should cull the use of Robotics in Policing? What about responding to domestic terrorism events?
What is the moral difference between a killing committed by an autonomous Robot or a human being?
Lethal Autonomous robots? - irrisponsible and a terrible idea all around.
Lethal Remote Control bots? - You mean like drones? A tricky topic indeed. Watch "Good Kill". I just might give you some perspective on how easily and anonymously lethal remote control devices can be misused.
The problem with most interactions between civilians and LEOs is the term "officer safety" there are many different situations from not answering questions, not following orders, to not taking your hand out of your pockets and moving to a location the officer is directing you to move to, all of these things and much more are used as excuses for excessive force used by LEOs while interrogating, throw in a remotely operated "thingie" ie robot LEO and where does officer safety come into the mix, naturally no human is close to the suspect, so will the threat and need for extra ie over the top protection be extended to a LEO robot same as it is for police K9s?
It's a very slippery slope that the civilians will never reach parity with....
It's all about control, being a figure of authority, they are taught to be that way at the academy and then dealing with the worst of society makes them callus, I have been friends with a lot of LEO's over the years from lowly beat cops to detectives, but the new cops of today are way more aggressive than is necessary in most cases. The thing that I've always bitched to them about is giving people the benefit of doubt until they are proven to be a problem, most beat cops that have been on the job know when they are addressing a non-threat and when the POE is a potential threat to them or anyone involved but yet they treat a 90 year old grandma the same as a 3 time looser with a mile long rap sheet.
It's not that they can't see the difference, it's that some are so brainwashed about taking control of any given situation using whatever means is necessary that they loose sight of who they work for and what they are suppose to do (protect and serve the public), some are even rouge cowboys that get off on the power they have over the public with little to no recourse for the public if they are mistreated unfairly, certainly no punishment for the LEO unless it goes to trial or is pleaded out of court into a cash settlement and a slap on the wrist for the cop.
Honesty it's a thankless job, sure when they get it right we all appreciate it, but most of the time the LEOs take it too far pushing people into confrontations, most LEOs are only doing what they are told to do but are freelancing in the way the assignment is carried out day to day, they are human just like the rest of us but carry the power of the law and judicial system behind them...that's a hell of a lot of power to try to control.
And like I said most of their calls are going to pertain with the worst of society and people who have little or no regard for the law, they would just as easily steal from you or kill you if they thought their chances where very good that they wouldn't get caught, they are drunks and druggies that couldn't tell you if it was night or day but have a opinion about the cops being called.
Don't get me wrong there are many many good LEOs, people who are honorable and do differentiate between the good citizen that needs their help and the bad guys who are trying to get over on them, sometimes it just takes them awhile to figure it all out...lol
But robot cops.......now we have a problem that will require the 3 laws of AI/robots, at least in my opinion.
You are absolutely correct.....the core of society needs to change but that will require more than just education but it is the right place to start.
One problem I think about is ethics; if a law enforcement robot could save a three year old girl or a fifty year old man from a car crash, and it only has time to save one, which life is saved? What if the little girl has terrible injuries and is unlikely to survive?
These ethical issues are no easier for people; so how would you program a robot to respond correctly?
Where would we draw the line between a drone and a robot?
If a drone had some autonomous features, like stabilization, aim control, etc. could those features count as an AI? Where would you draw the line? Because there's been no massive leap forward (Positronic Brain via Asimov) to enable true AI, the AI can't really make decisions at such a high level that the "Three Laws" apply. I think we are dealing with really simple programming right now, and the regulations that will come first are going to to be very concrete, and much more related to the use of very simple Robots; mechanically complex, but very simple AI.
It seems like they just rigged a grenade to a bomb disposal bot and drove it up to the suspect. Now, if the law of escalation follows, the terrorists will be strapping shotguns to drones and driving them through malls soon.
These are "Robots" in the sense of RC vehicles. Eventually, we may have full-on Law Enforcement bots, like the walker bots in Deus Ex Liberty Island. Is the time to stop the slippery slope now?
I agree......and a lot of drones now have a limited AI to a degree like the Phantom 4 that will track and follow a target, and you know that is the tip of the iceberg as to what the government can do with a military drone, but yeah you are right about no positronic brain yet, we are not too far from semi-autonomous robot even if it is totally based in programming not independent AI. When a robot controlled remotely by law enforcement takes on a human-like appearance (biped, upright stature) even if controlled remotely they will have to implement some fail-safe measures to protect innocent bystanders and hostages, might not be the 3 laws but some form of accountability will have to be implemented before the law suits fly.
Firstly, the "robot three laws" isn't real. It's not applicable to AI implementations outside of syfy.
Nearly everyone agrees autonomous lethal robots will never be a thing that's accepted at any level. (unless America wants oil, then I dunno)
I agree with what's said above, remote control lethal bots are a VERY slippery slope with tons of ethical implications. We've had remote control deaths for years with drones; this is only the first time law enforcement has killed someone with one. I think it's terrible and inevitable that many people will take this opportunity to equip law enforcement with more such things to use in such cases.
Equipping them with these tools even for extreme cases is dangerous ethically because you can't guarantee they won't be used more and more until the original intent is overridden and they are widely used outside of what's appropriate.
TLDR; The bell cannot be unrung and checks and balances don't last forever therefore we will see more lethal remote controls used in law enforcement.
It will happen....military first, civilian law enforcement second, it's the reason DARPA exists today and treaties are already being signed about the development and implementation because they are that close to a working prototype (few years away), just because it's unethical or the public doesn't think it's a good idea are not good enough reasons to stop the military industrial complex from waging war and removing the choice a soldier makes before pulling a trigger out of the equation.
I hope I never see the day, but I fear it is closer than any of us think.
might sound good now.... what about when it's used to quell a "domestic terrorist attack" that's actually the people trying to get power back from gov?
Example: how would you feel if the gov used remote lethal drones/bots on the cattle ranchers? .... slippery slope... it's all in how it's labeled and labels change with time.
If a universal brain healing device was invented, at first it would be used to heal schizophrenics, but eventually it possibly would be used to "Heal" all the unfortunate people who prefer to sit in a darkened room and play Video Games instead of playing outside.
Also, just throwing this out there, I would not mind having a Ghost in the Shell style police force. I just don't want RoboCop.
I don't see a future in America where we have very relaxed interactions between police and civilians until we fix more of the core issues in our society... Namely education
How do we fix this? Maybe I'm uninformed, but I don't see much wrong with education right now, aside from the fact that college is looked at as a mandatory thing.
LOL....you now see the end goal of the people in power, they have absolutely no problem sending you or me to war to die, they don't care, but when it comes to human against human there is a chance for communication, a chance for persuasion, a chance to just talk it out, but human vs machine, naw humans will loose in most cases, I hate to draw a parallel but sky net, the terminator are good examples of a man vs machine fight (sans the molten metal stuff). It's 1984 on steroids but we will all truly be slaves if the government ever really gets control of robot a army, sounds like SiFi stuff doesn't it? sad thing is a lot of fiction becomes fact over time.
I did not read this whole thread due to time constraints so I apologize if anyone has pointed this out already. Not too long ago I watched a special on TV about police robots. It had the basic stuff like the small video drones and even touched on the bomb disposal robots (like the one used to blow up the suspect.)
The one thing that came to mind when watching this unfold on TV was that during this police robot special was that they could attach guns, specifically shotguns, to the bomb disposal robots and that they could load less-than-lethal rounds into it to take down a suspect that was too dangerous for humans to get close to. The gun wasn't even special. Any semi-auto or full auto shotgun could be attached and used.
After finding out that they put a bomb onto the robot and used it to destroy the suspect I couldn't help but think of the precedence that this sets. You take a piece of equipment designed to save lives and use it to kill. You take a piece of equipment that can be used in a less-than-lethal way and use it to kill.
After all that has happened with the police not having a good public image you would think they would try and do everything they could to resolve this peacefully. And yes, I do realize that friends and loved ones were killed but when you become a police officer you give up the right to take revenge.
Anyway I look at this it just gets worse. Public safety is down due to the police blowing up suspects before they are found guilty. And police safety is down because the public is angry.
I think it sends a very clear message from the police. You kill cops ? We kill you. No due process. No attempts to detain. No longer civil servents. Kind of Judge Dred ish ? We are just the inmates they have to control.