Robot wars are inevitable, so why not televise them?

We can’t stop the arms industry developing killer robots. But we can stop them from killing us.

Duncan Jefferies
Aug 24, 2017 · 5 min read

Not content with taking our jobs, robots are poised to take our lives — at least according to a group of robotics and AI experts. In an open letter to the United Nations, the likes of Tesla’s Elon Musk and Alphabet’s Mustafa Suleyman warned that the development and use of intelligent killing machines would be like opening — yep, you guessed it — Pandora’s box. But are we really in danger of being terminated by ED-209?

While it’s true that hyperbole and AI go together like beans and toast, fully automated drones, tanks and machine guns are likely to appear on battlefields within the next few decades. In fact they already exist.

Samsung’s SGR-A1 sentry gun, which is capable of firing autonomously, has already been deployed along the South Korean bit of the Korean Demilitarized Zone (though there’s some dispute over whether or not it’s set to ‘free-fire’ mode). Naturally, as the world’s second biggest arms dealer, the UK is also hard at work on its own killer bot, the suitably evil-sounding Taranis drone. Although it flies under the control of a human operator it could “technically fly autonomously”, which is the sort of neat trick that’s bound to have Saudi princes reaching for their cheque books quicker than you can say ‘bombs away’.

Not to be outdone, Russia is developing autonomous tanks, which we’ll probably see rolled out across Eastern Europe in the near future. And naturally the US is also fully on-board with artificially intelligent warfare: it’s autonomous warship, the Sea Hunter, is designed to hunt submarines without the need for a human crew.

At the moment a human being has to approve the actions of automated killing machines. But the line between autonomous and human-controlled already looks pretty blurry, and could be erased altogether before long. According to the AI experts’ letter, that would allow armed conflict to be fought “at a scale greater than ever, and at timescales faster than humans can comprehend.” In other words, China and the US could fight WWIII and agree peace terms while you’re watching the latest episode of Game of Thrones. Heck, you might not even have time to tweet “Team USA!!!” and a Bald Eagle emoji before it’s all over.

The letter-writing experts say the rise of these killer machines marks the “third revolution in warfare”, after the invention of gunpowder and nuclear weapons. In a previous letter they sent to the UN in 2015, they called for an outright ban on autonomous weapons. But it’s highly doubtful such an agreement could be reached.

Although 192 nations have agreed not to use chemical weapons, killer robots are a different proposition. The international arms industry thrives on high-tech weaponry that promises to deliver maximum enemy deaths with minimum civilian and troop casualties. Killer robots are the apogee of that promise — even though it often turns out to be a false one.

As all warmongers well know, the public would be more likely to support a war if they knew that troop carriers would return from the battlefield filled with scrap metal rather than dead soldiers. What’s more, robots with missing limbs and damaged minds don’t require extensive — and often expensive — rehabilitation. They don’t have families who will demand the government justify why their son or daughter sacrificed their life for their country. No war memorials will be erected in their honour. No inquests into their ‘deaths’ need be held.

On the battlefield, they will carry out their commanding officer’s orders without any of the tickles of conscience that might cause a human soldier to think twice about pulling the trigger. They don’t need to be fed. They don’t need to be entertained. And training consists of a software update. To paraphrase Spock, it’s war, Jim, but not as we know it.

All of which makes automated killing machines an irresistible proposition for many governments. The MoD, responding to the experts’ letter, said existing international law was capable of dealing with military machines that could one day identify, target and kill without human control, which could be read as “don’t interfere with our killer robot plans, thank you very much.” The US Department of Defense has also given no sign that it would participate in an international agreement banning autonomous weapons. And surely it won’t be long until Kim Jong-un announces his plan to attack the US with an army of great and glorious metal warriors.

However, any automated killing machines the arms industry develops will need to demonstrate their potential before governments agree to cough up for thousands of the things, and there’s no better demonstration than a good old fashioned war. Naturally that would be a disaster for humanity. But never fear: as Baldrick would say, I have a cunning plan to minimise the loss of life.

First, we get every country with access to killer robots to pick a battlefield far, far away from any sign of human civilisation — Antarctica, perhaps, once we’ve temporarily rounded up all the penguins. Or the moon. Or maybe North Korea after Trump turns it into thousands of square miles of radioactive glass. Once everyone’s agreed on the battlefield, we lay down a few ground rules — e.g. how many killer robots each country can deploy, how long the war will last, whether the next battle is going to be ‘capture the flag’ or a ‘free-for-all’, etc. Then we let them go at it until only one robot army is left standing.

Yes, that’s right: I’m advocating for a big budget version of Robot Wars. I know it sounds silly, but then so are most wars, so what’s the difference? Craig Charles could present it, wearing that natty leather jacket with the yellow sleeves. And every country could have it’s own speciality: plucky Russia with its automated tanks, the US with its sentient ships, Moldova with its sharp stick gaffer-taped to a Roomba.

The Maybot could strap a cannon on her arm and lead the UK army, thereby fulfilling her Boadicea fantasies. Trump could work out his daddy issues without the rest of us having to die a fiery death. And the TV rights would be worth billions, which would shut down any opposition from Rupert Murdoch. See? Everyone’s a winner. Except the killer robots.

)
Duncan Jefferies

Written by

Freelance writer on digital culture, science, tech. Bylines in @Guardian, @HowWeGetToNext, @IndyVoices

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade