I think it is unnecessary to restrict the use of artificial intelligence in warfare for now because many soldiers already suffer from serious post-war trauma. AI can reduce human casualties by …Read MoreI think it is unnecessary to restrict the use of artificial intelligence in warfare for now because many soldiers already suffer from serious post-war trauma. AI can reduce human casualties by replacing soldiers in dangerous combat situations. However, it is true that this might lower the political cost of war and increase the number of conflicts. Still, the use of AI in warfare is not clearly defined, and a unified international code of conduct is unrealistic at this stage. Each country has different military technology, security environment, and strategic goals. The United States and China consider AI as the core of their military power, while other countries use it only for defense or do not have sufficient technology. The meaning of ethical use also varies by country, which makes consensus even harder and could cause more conflict. Yet, in the long term, international discussions about limiting autonomous weapons and protecting civilians will eventually become necessary.Read Less
The use of AI is scary, and a worldwide effort could help reduce its effect if properly controlled. People still don’t know how far it can go to, and some might have negative intentions with it. A …Read MoreThe use of AI is scary, and a worldwide effort could help reduce its effect if properly controlled. People still don’t know how far it can go to, and some might have negative intentions with it. A code of conduct would aid in security efforts heavily.Read Less
Yes, I do think that a shared code of conduct for AI in warfare is necessary. Having shared rules, like keeping humans in the loop or banning certain weapons, would reduce misunderstandings and make …Read MoreYes, I do think that a shared code of conduct for AI in warfare is necessary. Having shared rules, like keeping humans in the loop or banning certain weapons, would reduce misunderstandings and make conflicts safer in the case that AI is being used in them. It would be hard to get every country to agree, but even basic guidelines would help prevent dangerous risks from happening.Read Less
No. While the idea of a global code of conduct for AI in warfare apperrs noble, in practice it is unrealistic and potentially harmful. Nations have distinct security needs, threat perceptions and …Read MoreNo. While the idea of a global code of conduct for AI in warfare apperrs noble, in practice it is unrealistic and potentially harmful. Nations have distinct security needs, threat perceptions and strategic priorities. A universal framework would impose external constraintson on their sovereign right to develop defense technologies suited to their own scircumstances. What benefits one state’s security might weaken another’ s deterrence. Moreover, such agreements would be nearly impossible to enforce. AI evolve rapidly, operate within classified programs, and cannot be monitoried through traditional verification methods like those used for nuclear weapons. Powerful countries might sign symbolic pledges but seretly continue unresticted development, and terrorists will directly ignore the regulation the abuse the related skills anyway. Finally, difining the what constitues “AI in warfare” is ambiguous, atonomous drone and data analysis tools that are influenced by AI have blurred boundaries which make any unified regulation obsolete as technology evolves. Ethical frameworks often lag behind innovation, which causes outdated rigid international rules before they could be implemented.Read Less
I think it is unnecessary to restrict the use of artificial intelligence in warfare for now because many soldiers already suffer from serious post-war trauma. AI can reduce human casualties by …Read MoreI think it is unnecessary to restrict the use of artificial intelligence in warfare for now because many soldiers already suffer from serious post-war trauma. AI can reduce human casualties by replacing soldiers in dangerous combat situations. However, it is true that this might lower the political cost of war and increase the number of conflicts. Still, the use of AI in warfare is not clearly defined, and a unified international code of conduct is unrealistic at this stage. Each country has different military technology, security environment, and strategic goals. The United States and China consider AI as the core of their military power, while other countries use it only for defense or do not have sufficient technology. The meaning of ethical use also varies by country, which makes consensus even harder and could cause more conflict. Yet, in the long term, international discussions about limiting autonomous weapons and protecting civilians will eventually become necessary. Read Less
The use of AI is scary, and a worldwide effort could help reduce its effect if properly controlled. People still don’t know how far it can go to, and some might have negative intentions with it. A …Read MoreThe use of AI is scary, and a worldwide effort could help reduce its effect if properly controlled. People still don’t know how far it can go to, and some might have negative intentions with it. A code of conduct would aid in security efforts heavily. Read Less
Yes, I do think that a shared code of conduct for AI in warfare is necessary. Having shared rules, like keeping humans in the loop or banning certain weapons, would reduce misunderstandings and make …Read MoreYes, I do think that a shared code of conduct for AI in warfare is necessary. Having shared rules, like keeping humans in the loop or banning certain weapons, would reduce misunderstandings and make conflicts safer in the case that AI is being used in them. It would be hard to get every country to agree, but even basic guidelines would help prevent dangerous risks from happening. Read Less
No. While the idea of a global code of conduct for AI in warfare apperrs noble, in practice it is unrealistic and potentially harmful. Nations have distinct security needs, threat perceptions and …Read MoreNo. While the idea of a global code of conduct for AI in warfare apperrs noble, in practice it is unrealistic and potentially harmful. Nations have distinct security needs, threat perceptions and strategic priorities. A universal framework would impose external constraintson on their sovereign right to develop defense technologies suited to their own scircumstances. What benefits one state’s security might weaken another’ s deterrence.
Moreover, such agreements would be nearly impossible to enforce. AI evolve rapidly, operate within classified programs, and cannot be monitoried through traditional verification methods like those used for nuclear weapons. Powerful countries might sign symbolic pledges but seretly continue unresticted development, and terrorists will directly ignore the regulation the abuse the related skills anyway.
Finally, difining the what constitues “AI in warfare” is ambiguous, atonomous drone and data analysis tools that are influenced by AI have blurred boundaries which make any unified regulation obsolete as technology evolves. Ethical frameworks often lag behind innovation, which causes outdated rigid international rules before they could be implemented. Read Less