We’ve all seen hit flicks such as Terminator and wondered how we’d measure up
against rogue, omnipotent demi-robots resulting from an overly ambitious
programming team with a desire for military superiority. But should we start our
search to protect modern-day John Connor? With the revelation of several key
developments in the area, signs point to us potentially duking it out with
the intelligence behind our beloved devices more than we’d hope.
The dynamics of war have changed drastically since our first global conflict.
At the time of Austria Hungary’s declaration of war on Serbia in 1914,
many soldiers found themselves solely involved in hand to hand combat,
as military technology was relatively limited and numerous battles were won
simply by sheer force. Since these times, our capabilities have advanced so
swiftly that we now have the potential to eliminate a target thousands of miles
away with only a single photograph of their appearance. Of course,
these missions, often reserved for drones worth millions of dollars, are
not without fault; George Bush’s drone campaign to eliminate terrorism in
the Middle East has led to the deaths of over 160 Pakistani children over
several years, all of whom which were obviously not the target of these strikes1.
Clearly, we have a lot to learn about the area before rolling out the proverbial red carpet.
several years, all of whom which were obviously not the target of these strikes1.
Clearly, we have a lot to learn about the area before rolling out the proverbial red carpet.
However, in an ironic twist, these mishaps have even furthered calls for
adoption and advancements in the sector of autonomous combat.
Nearly every global actor has dabbled in intelligent warfare, with even ISIS
developing and using drones to fend off and disrupt attacks from larger, more
sophisticated opponents. With relatively isolated groups having their own mini
drone army powerful enough to stop coordinated air campaigns, the valuability
of non-human combat is indisputable. In fact, the US views the area as so
strategically vital to the future of warfare that several high-ranking
members of the Department of Defense testified to prevent Google from producing
a facial-recognition technology for the Chinese government, even though the request
had no apparent military implications2. Russia has taken this notion a step further,
developing land robots armed with turrets for arms and impeccable aim,
And these are the inventions we know, all using technology that has been around for years. What's the behind cryptic doors of the Pentagon, we may never see.
With the rise of warfare, it’s important to understand that we currently are in the most
peaceful time in history, with wars being sporadic and less involved than any other
period in our species' time on this planet. But is this a result of global collaboration,
period in our species' time on this planet. But is this a result of global collaboration,
or a bi-product of mutually assured destruction fears, now more than ever?
Luciano Floridi has repeatedly asserted that we are in a new age, shaped with
unforeseen ethical dilemmas to boot. Should one view developing competitive tech
with the ability to kill as a complete disregard for morals, or simply as keeping up with
the other forces in the world? Regardless of your opinion on the matter, we can all agree
on one thing: it's officially time to say "hasta la vista, baby" to traditional warfare.
Our future, if we’re not careful. One day, she’ll know the answer.
Luciano Floridi has repeatedly asserted that we are in a new age, shaped with
unforeseen ethical dilemmas to boot. Should one view developing competitive tech
with the ability to kill as a complete disregard for morals, or simply as keeping up with
the other forces in the world? Regardless of your opinion on the matter, we can all agree
on one thing: it's officially time to say "hasta la vista, baby" to traditional warfare.
Our future, if we’re not careful. One day, she’ll know the answer.
I thought this was a really great article! It was easy to read, I learned things, and it was even entertaining. I think you raised some valid concerns and questions about warfare and what the future of tech will hold for us, and it was interesting thinking about tech in this way. I might suggest weaving the readings into the article a little earlier just to make them a more key part of your argument, but overall awesome job.
ReplyDeleteGreat read! A thought I always have about technology asserting itself into the military scene is that with each iteration of military tech, there seems to be a degree of detachment between the operator of the technology and the person/place that is being attacked/surveilled. While hand-to-hand combat was a lot more gruesome, the intimacy seems to be a deterrent, whereas the experience of controlling modern day military technology is little more than being behind the controller of a videogame. My only suggestion would be, as the comment above me said, to weave a bit more of the readings in at an earlier time.
ReplyDeleteIt's crazy to think how much has changed since the time of the great war, and I really like how you brought that into it with the comparisons of Austria-Hungary and the tech used in the current conflicts going on today. Awesome job with the super scripted sources as well, it helped to keep the flow of the article while also allowing the reader to delve further into the topic if they so desired. If I were to add anything to it, I would maybe try to integrate Moor's ideals or reference his ideals throughout, I feel like this goes hand in hand with what Moor was talking about. Other than that, I really liked it, the terminator references throughout definitely made sure it wasn't a dry read!
ReplyDelete