Page Nav


Gradient Skin



Responsive Ad

Elon Musk, DeepMind founders, and others sign pledge to not develop lethal AI weapon systems

Elon Musk, DeepMind founders, and others sign pledge to not develop lethal AI weapon systems ...

Elon Musk, DeepMind founders, and others sign pledge to not develop lethal AI weapon systems

A remote-controlled robot equipped with a machine gun under development by the United States Marine Corps.
Image: USMC

Tech leaders, including Elon Musk and the three co-founders of Google’s AI subsidiary DeepMind, have signed a pledge promising to not develop “lethal autonomous weapons.”

It’s the latest move from an unofficial and global coalition of researchers and executives that’s opposed to the propagation of such technology. The pledge warns that weapon systems that use AI to “[select] and [enga ge] targets without human intervention” pose moral and pragmatic threats. Morally, the signatories argue, the decision to take a human life “should never be delegated to a machine.” On the pragmatic front, they say that the spread of such weaponry would be “dangerously destabilizing for every country and individual.”

The pledge was published today at the 2018 International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI) in Stockholm, and it was organized by the Future of Life Institute, a research institute that aims to “mitigate existential risk” to humanity. The institute has previously helped issue letters from some of the same individuals, calling on the United Nations to consider new regulations for what are known as lethal autonomous weapons, or LAWS. This, however, is the first time those involved have pledged individually to not develop such technology.

Signatories include SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk; the three co-founders of Google’s DeepMind subsidiary, Shane Legg, Mustafa Suleyman, and Demis Hassabis; Skype founder Jaan Tallinn; and some of the world’s most respected and prominent AI researchers, including Stuart Russell, Yoshua Bengio, and Jürgen Schmidhuber.

Max Tegmark, a signatory of the pledge and professor of physics at MIT, said in a statement that the pledge showed AI leaders “shifting from talk to action.” Tegmark said the pledge did what politicians have not: impose hard limits on the development of AI for military use. “Weapons that autonomously decide to kill people are as disgusting and destabilizing as bioweapons and should be dealt with in the same way,” said Tegmark.

So far, attempts to muster support for the international regulation of autonomous weapons have been ineffectual. Campaigners have suggested that LAWS should be subject to restrictions, similar to those placed on chemical weapons and landmines. But note that it’s incredibly difficult to draw a line betwe en what does and does not constitute an autonomous system. For example, a gun turret could target individuals but not fire on them, with a human “in the loop” simply rubber-stamping its decisions.

They also point out that enforcing such laws would be a huge challenge, as the technology to develop AI weaponry is already widespread. Additionally, the countries most involved in developing this technology (like the US and China) have no real incentive not to do so.

US Conducts Air War Against ISIL From Base In Persian Gulf Region
AI is already being developed to analyze video footage from military drones.
Photo by John Moore / Getty Images

Paul Scharre, a military analyst who wrote a book on the future of warfare and AI, told The Verge this year that there isn’t enough “momentum” to push forward international restrictions. “There isn’t a core group of Western democratic states involved, and that’s been critical [with past weapons bans], with countries like Canada and Norway, leading the charge,” said Scharre.

However, while international regulations might not be coming anytime soon, recent events have shown that collective activism like today’s pledge can make a difference. Google, for example, was rocked by employee protests after it was revealed that the company was helping develop non-lethal AI drone tools for the Pentagon. Weeks later, it published new research guidelines, promising not to develop AI weapon systems. A threatened boycott of South Korea’s KAIST university had similar results, with the KAIST’s president promising not to develop military AI “counter to human dignity including autonomous weapons lacking meaningful human control.”

In both cases, it’s reasonable to point out that the organizations involved are not stopping themselves from developing military AI tools with other, non-lethal uses. But a promise not to put a computer solely in charge of killing is better than no promise at all.

The full text of the pledge can be read below, and a full list of signatories can be found here:

Artificial intelligence (AI) is poised to play an increasing role in military systems. There is an urgent opportunity and necessity for citizens, policymakers, and leaders to distinguish between acceptable and unacceptable uses of AI.

In this light, we the undersigned agree that the decision to take a human life should never be delegated to a machine. There is a moral component to this position, that we should not allow machines to make life-taking decisions for which others â€" or nobody â€" will be culp able.

There is also a powerful pragmatic argument: lethal autonomous weapons, selecting and engaging targets without human intervention, would be dangerously destabilizing for every country and individual. Thousands of AI researchers agree that by removing the risk, attributability, and difficulty of taking human lives, lethal autonomous weapons could become powerful instruments of violence and oppression, especially when linked to surveillance and data systems.

Moreover, lethal autonomous weapons have characteristics quite different from nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, and the unilateral actions of a single group could too easily spark an arms race that the international community lacks the technical tools and global governance systems to manage. Stigmatizing and preventing such an arms race should be a high priority for national and global security.

We, the undersigned, call upon governments and government leaders to crea te a future with strong international norms, regulations and laws against lethal autonomous weapons. These currently being absent, we opt to hold ourselves to a high standard: we will neither participate in nor support the development, manufacture, trade, or use of lethal autonomous weapons. We ask that technology companies and organizations, as well as leaders, policymakers, and other individuals, join us in this pledge.

Next Up In Tech

  • Instagram will upgrade two-factor authentication to guard against SIM hacking
  • Twitter says it doesn’t ‘have the bandwidth’ to fix verification right now
  • The next generation of VR headsets will connect over a single USB-C cable
  • Nest CEO steps down as division is brought under th e Google Home team
  • Undercover Facebook moderator was instructed not to remove fringe groups or hate speech
  • A major election software maker allowed remote access on its systems for years

Command Line

Command Line delivers daily updates from the near-future.

By signing up, you agree to our Privacy Policy and European users agree to the data transfer policy. This Article has a component height of 21. The sidebar size is long.Source: Google News US Business | Netizen 24 United States

Reponsive Ads