Collaborating Authors


Russia: Our Killer Robots Don't Need Any Pesky International Laws


United Nations delegates are currently meeting to debate possible regulations controlling autonomous killer robots -- but Russia is having none of it. The Russian delegate, representing a country that has already developed and deployed military robots in real-world conflicts, remained steadfast that the global community doesn't need any new rules or regulations to govern the use of killer robots, The Telegraph reports. That pits Russia against much of the rest of the international community, who are calling for rules to keep humans in charge of the decision to open fire, highlighting on the main anxieties and ethical conundrums surrounding autonomous weaponry. The argument from Russia is that the AI algorithms driving these killer robots are already advanced enough to differentiate friend from foe from civilian, and that therefore there's no need to burden the autonomous death machines with unnecessary regulations. "The high level of autonomy of these weapons allows [them] to operate within a dynamic conflict situation and in various environments while maintaining an appropriate level of selectivity and precision," the delegate said, according to The Telegraph.

US and Russia under fire for blocking 'Killer Robot' rules at UN backed conference

Daily Mail - Science & tech

A key opponent of high-tech, automated weapons known as'killer robots' is blaming countries like the U.S. and Russia for blocking consensus at a U.N.-backed conference, where most countries wanted to ensure that humans stay at the controls of lethal machines. Coordinator Mary Wareham of the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots spoke Monday after experts from dozens of countries agreed before dawn Saturday at the U.N. in Geneva on 10 'possible guiding principles' about such'Lethal Automated Weapons Systems.' Point 2 said: 'Human responsibility for decisions on the use of weapons systems must be retained since accountability cannot be transferred to machines.' Killer robots must be banned to prevent unlawful killings, injuries and other violations of human rights'before it's too late', according to Amnesty International. Wareham said such language wasn't binding, adding that'it's time to start laying down some rules now.' Members of the LAWS conference will meet again in November. Last week Amnesty International said killer robots must be banned to prevent unlawful killings, injuries and other violations of human rights'before it's too late', as the talks kicked off.

The workplaces of the future will be more human, not less


In the 18th century, those operating at the highest levels of society, from London to Moscow, needed to be able to speak French, then the language of status, the nobility, politics, intellectual life and modernisation. A hundred years later, British advances in industry, science and engineering meant that English succeeded French: a tongue with West Germanic origins replaced a romance language as the means of conducting business and diplomacy on the international stage. Today, even in some parts of China, English is still used as the global lingua franca, a leveller that enables deals to get done and the wheels of commerce and technology to spin. Around a decade ago, another type of language – one that was written rather than spoken – was held up as a deterministic factor for those seeking to gain influence or advantage in the digital age: coding. Its champions proselytised that proficiency in programming would determine employability and access to a thrusting, energetic entrepreneurial future. Over two or three years, a small industry sprang up, intent on instructing those who had no formal education in computer science to create products using C .