Dr. Asaro is Associate Professor in the School of Media Studies at the New School in New York City. He is the co-founder of the International Committee for Robot Arms Control, and has written on lethal robotics from the perspective of just war theory and human rights. Dr. Asaro's research also examines agency and autonomy, liability and punishment, and privacy and surveillance as it applies to consumer robots, industrial automation, smart buildings, aerial drones and autonomous vehicles.
I have been asked by Science & Film to review the realism of EYE IN THE in terms of the new technologies we see deployed in the film. Most of the technologies employed in the film narrative have some basis in reality, though many are still in very early stages, or proof-of-concept, and remain far from the reliable and useful technologies depicted in the film.
Last week the Future of Life Institute released a letter signed by some 1,500 artificial intelligence (AI), robotics and technology researchers. Among them were celebrities of science and the technology industry—Stephen Hawking, Elon Musk and Steve Wozniak—along with public intellectuals such as Noam Chomsky and Daniel Dennett. The letter called for an international ban on offensive autonomous weapons, which could target and fire weapons without meaningful human control.
This article considers the recent literature concerned with establishing an international prohibition on autonomous weapon systems. It seeks to address concerns expressed by some scholars that such a ban might be problematic for various reasons. It argues in favour of a theoretical foundation for such a ban based on human rights and humanitarian principles that are not only moral, but also legal ones. In particular, an implicit requirement for human judgement can be found in international humanitarian law governing armed conﬂict.
As the military’s armed surveillance drones have become the iconic weapon of the early twenty-first century, they have also introduced radical transformations in the traditional labor of those who operate them the pilots, crew, analysts, and commanders. In so doing, these transformations have engendered new kinds of subjectivity, with new ways of experiencing the work of surveillance and killing.
(Google Translate version)
"The American philosopher Peter Asaro is one of the leaders of the global resistance against fighting robots. "Unlike humans, they are not able to make moral and legal considerations."
"Peter Asaro, a spokesman for the Campaign to Stop Killer Robots and an artificial intelligence expert at The New School, similarly said Russian drones wouldn't be an immediate game changer in the rising tensions between Russia and the West.
"It's already pretty well acknowledged that if Russia wants to invade the Baltics, they can do it in 24 hours and NATO can't do much about it," Asaro said. "Them having some super sophisticated robot isn't going to change that."
"It’s sure to be a heady good time. Panel titles include “Legal Personhood For Robots,” “The Ethical Characteristics of Autonomous Robots,” and the drenched-in-wordplay “Siriously?
"Paradoxically, the human factor is also cited by those in favor of the development of lethal autonomous weapons. "Robots aren't scared," Steve Groves, from the conservative U.S. think tank Heritage Foundation, told CBS last May. "They don't have fits of madness. They don't react to rage."
The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots is an international coalition of 59 groups, including Human Rights Watch and the Nobel Women’s Committee.
Spokesman Peter Asaro, an affiliate scholar at the Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School, said an international treaty to ban the weapons was urgent.
He told The New Daily killer robots would make it difficult to hold anyone accountable for war crimes and atrocities.
CIS Affiliate Scholars Peter Asaro, Ryan Calo and Woodrow Hartzog will all be participating in this two-day conference.
Registration is open for We Robot 2015 and we have a great program planned:
Friday, April 10
Registration and Breakfast
Welcome Remarks: Dean Kellye Testy, University of Washington School of Law
Introductory Remarks: Ryan Calo, Program Committee Chair
For more information visit: https://citp.princeton.edu/event/lunch-timer-asaro-tang/
Location: Bowl 001, Robertson Hall
Food and discussion begin at 12:15 pm. Open to current Princeton faculty, fellows and students only. RSVP required. Co-sponsored with WWS and LAPA.
CIS Affiliate Scholars Peter Asaro, Ryan Calo and Woodrow Hartzog are listed as participants for We Robot 2014. Robotics is becoming a transformative technology. We Robot 2014 builds on existing scholarship exploring the role of robotics to examine how the increasing sophistication of robots and their widespread deployment everywhere from the home, to hospitals, to public spaces, and even to the battlefield disrupts existing legal regimes or requires rethinking of various policy issues. If you are on the front lines of robot theory, design, or development, we hope to see you.
The motion under debate will be:“Should there be an absolute ban on autonomous systems capable of using lethal force?” Two key speakers will argue for and against the motion, and respond to each other’s presentation. This will be followed by a discussion session with the audience, and a public vote.
FLI’s Ariel Conn recently spoke with Heather Roff and Peter Asaro about autonomous weapons. Roff, a research scientist at The Global Security Initiative at Arizona State University and a senior research fellow at the University of Oxford, recently compiled an international database of weapons systems that exhibit some level of autonomous capabilities. Asaro is a philosopher of science, technology, and media at The New School in New York City.
Peter Asaro (assistant professor in the School of Media Studies at The New School) and S. Matthew Liao (director of the Center for Bioethics at New York University) talk to Live Science's Denise Chow and Space.com's Tariq Malik about the ethics of AI.
Hours after gunman Micah Johnson ambushed police officers in downtown Dallas, he was killed by a bomb strapped on a police robot. Robots in the past have stopped a lot of dangerous situations, but using a robot to kill - that was a first for a domestic police force. Kris Van Cleave reports on the ethical questions about the use of robots to kill suspects.
Affiliate Scholar Peter Asaro is interviewed.