Will war become your favorite virtual game?
The military actions of recent months clearly suggest the near future. Soon in wars we will rely mostly on precise and fast autonomous war machines and drones. This projects nightmarish images into the mind. The machine with intelligence shows no sympathy, is rarely wrong, looks monstrous, allows no escape, and has strength and speed unmatched by humans.
🔻 Could autonomous weapons with artificial intelligence be the new atomic weapons, the new deterrent against warfare?
On the other hand, there is something useful in leaving wars in the hands of robots and intelligent machines. We’re turning over the dirty, dangerous part of fighting to machines, drones, robots, AI weapons. We’re not dying, some inanimate tools are, they’re fighting amongst themselves and we’re just keeping score. Stop! This is mixed signals news. It seems like we’re being sentenced to life in prison, but we should take comfort in the fact that prison guarantees us the best possible conditions.
🔴 Is there a war with clean hands?
🔴 Will we become callous warmongers?
🔴 Which comes out cheaper – money for ethics or money for AI weapons?
Starting a war is obviously a political and human decision.
Wars will only be prevented if people change. There are no signals of a switch in our views. Human prejudices, vindictiveness, power-lust and thirst for territories are unchanged since prehistoric times. We are left only with the consolation that technical progress will reduce human involvement in the inevitable wars. The refinement of weapons and the advent of AI in them has recently made them a full-fledged, stand-alone tool for battle, so this hope is strengthened.
What is the flip side of the coin? Paradoxically, autonomous war machines could make wars even more than they do today! The cost of highly destructive weapons will fall, and the need for large, equipped and trained armies will diminish. People are often tempted to test the limits of what is possible, but gambling and insane politicians are fortunately the exception. Most politicians refrain from militaristic risks because of the casualties among their own populations. They are scared of discontent among their constituents. There is a supposed gain, but also a risk of losing your bet. But when we are inspired by the idea that military objectives can be achieved cheaply, without great human sacrifice, and so quickly and surprisingly that a retaliatory strike is impossible, the temptation for a military solution grows. For some people with power, war may seem too easy, an “innocent” and virtual thing, like the games of childhood.
🔻 So will AI save us from waging war?
From personal involvement yes, somewhat. But there is room for a sad irony: the unaltered human, will not be reassured that it only inflicts damage on inanimate objects and artificial beings that are not the irritant. He will seek you out with his AI weapons where you live. He wants something else – to make you admit that he is winning, he wants you to sign that he is right or that you will now obey him! The unchanged dopey man cares about smashing you, not a pile of metal with artificial intelligence, because he knows there are still humans behind every armada of weapons. And when he finds you he won’t just wave his hand at you, he won’t just give you a virtual pyrotechnic show…
🔻 What is our message?
Investments in weapons have never deterred us from going to war, but investments in ethical switching, in renewing people’s views, we don’t see. We seem to think that everything good is already available and known, it just needs to be applied. That it is not being applied and people cannot be made to apply it proves that we do not have real impactful and meaningful worldviews available. But it’s an uncomfortable topic and there’s a taboo to be placed on it! And the beginning of this debate needs to be set!
Authors: Ivan Sapundzhiev and Ralitsa Atanasova
