Shulou(Shulou.com)11/24 Report--

The decision by the San Francisco government to allow police to use robots to kill suspects for the first time in the United States has caused a great deal of controversy. Will this open a Pandora's box in the future, make it a reality for robots to suppress protests, and subvert the ethical principles of artificial intelligence that robots are "uncontrollable"?

Last Tuesday, the San Francisco Council passed a bill authorizing the San Francisco Police Department to use police robots for lethal purposes if necessary. In popular terms, they allow the police to use robots to remotely kill suspects when it is necessary to protect lives and have no other choice.

The controversial decision not only immediately attracted media attention across the United States, but also brought the topic of "robots", which has been going on for years, back into the focus of discussion. When the bill was submitted for discussion last month, it sparked widespread concern and heated discussion in the San Francisco Bay area.

Before the formal vote, the San Francisco City Council had been discussing the matter for weeks. On the day of the vote, the San Francisco City Council held a heated debate on this issue for more than two hours. In the end, the equipment authorization of the San Francisco Police Department was approved by a 8:3 vote.

The San Francisco city council approved the bill against the backdrop of public calls to crack down on crime. Like many big cities in the United States, San Francisco has faced a serious problem of deteriorating law and order in the past few years, leading to complaints from people and businesses. Smashing windows has become a common parking experience in San Francisco.

Due to the busy police, the downtown San Francisco business district has repeatedly robbed supermarkets and luxury stores in broad daylight, and many stores have no choice but to close their doors and evacuate. In addition to the high number of property crimes of beating, smashing and snatching, the vicious violent crimes of armed robbery are also increasing. San Francisco, which has a population of more than 800,000, had 56 homicides last year, up from 41 in 2019 before the outbreak.

In July, San Francisco voters dismissed Chesa Boudin, a radical leftist district attorney who failed to respond to crime, in a special referendum because of dissatisfaction with deteriorating law and order. Under the pressure of re-election, the mayor of San Francisco promised to take measures to crack down on crime, and the San Francisco Council has continuously introduced new technologies to curb crime. In September, the San Francisco Council approved police access to private surveillance camera data under certain circumstances.

During last Tuesday's debate, both pros and cons accused the other of creating panic. Both sides have put forward their own reasons and concerns. Supporters believe that this authorization is very prudent and clearly restricted, providing the police with a last resort in extreme cases, but opponents believe that it may bring the risk of excessive force by the police and aggravate the conflict between the police and people of color, especially between people of African descent.

Connie Chan, the Chinese congressman in San Francisco who proposed the bill, said she understood concerns about the use of force by the police, but "We need to use this equipment in accordance with California law. This is definitely not a hasty discussion." Another congressman, Rafael Mandelman, also voted for it. He said that radicals see the police as the opposite of danger and untrustworthiness, which is not good for public safety.

Shamann Walton, an African-American congressman who opposes it, stressed that he was not targeting the police, but was worried that the upgrading of police equipment might increase the chances of negative conflicts between the police and people of color. Relatively speaking, people of African descent are more worried and opposed to the possibility of excessive force by the police.

It is worth mentioning that the San Francisco prosecutor is also on the opposite side of the police department. Just a day before the San Francisco Senate vote, the San Francisco district attorney's office issued an open letter saying that authorizing robots to remotely "destroy" robots ran counter to San Francisco's progressive values. They therefore called on the city council to ban the police from using robots to use force against anyone.

Why is there this authorization vote that can be modified at any time to load the weapon? Under a new California law that came into effect this year, the California Police Department is required to obtain approval for the use of military-grade equipment. In order to prevent terrorist attacks, police stations in many American cities have purchased a number of military-grade explosion-proof robots over the past decade. The San Francisco Police Department is no exception, so it is necessary to submit an application for authorization to use the equipment.

However, when applying for authorization this time, the San Francisco Police Department added an extreme case scenario application, that is, when the lives of the public or police are under urgent threat and cannot use other means of force, allow them to use robots for lethal weapon choices. This means that they have the right to convert robots into offensive weapons to kill or blow up terrorist suspects remotely.

Lazzare, deputy commissioner of the San Francisco Police Department, mentioned during the city council debate that they applied for extreme circumstances authorization in response to cases like the mass shooting in Las Vegas in 2017. "We have to consider that in that case, [the use of robots] is a possible option."

The Las Vegas shootings are the bloodiest mass shootings and domestic terrorist attacks in American history. On October 1, 2017, a man fired more than 1000 bullets at a concert crowd downstairs with more than 20 modified semi-automatic rifles in a suite on the 32th floor of the Mandela Bay Hotel in Las Vegas. The police did not find the suspect until more than an hour later, but he has committed suicide, and the motive remains a mystery. The shooting killed 61 people (including suspects) and injured more than 500 others.

Perhaps the scene mentioned by Lazzare was so shocking that in the end, the San Francisco Council approved the police application by a majority. But parliament also made special rules, requiring the police to use robots for lethal purposes only after using other force or avoiding tactics, or after they were determined that they could not control the suspect by other means. Moreover, only a few high-ranking police officers can approve the use of robots as lethal force.

To allay concerns about robots, the San Francisco Police Department stressed that their existing robots are not equipped with weapons and have no plans to do so. But after being authorized, if their lives are threatened, they can install explosives on robots to "approach, confuse and disable violent, armed or dangerous suspects". "the robots that install these devices will only be used in extreme cases to protect or prevent innocent people from losing their lives."

According to the equipment list released by the San Francisco Police Department, they currently have a total of 17 bomb disposal robots, of which 12 can be put into use. The equipment, purchased in 2010-2017, is mainly used for the disposal of explosives, dangerous goods or in low-visibility environments, and has never been installed or used for explosive purposes before. In addition to applying for lethal use, the San Francisco Police Department also applied for the robots to be used for "training and simulation, criminal arrests, critical events, emergencies, arrests or handling suspicious equipment."

Although the San Francisco Police Department's current robots are not equipped with lethal weapons, some of the newer models can be equipped with weapons and operate remotely. The F5A bomb disposal robot can be fitted with large-caliber rifles through accessories; another QinetiQ Talon robot can also be converted into a military version with grenade launchers, machine guns and anti-equipment rifles, which is already a police version of the same robot used by the U.S. Army.

In other words, with the approval of the San Francisco City Council, the San Francisco Police Department can convert the current bomb disposal robot into a robot that operates remotely and fires directly at any time if the conditions are met. And that's why outsiders are worried.

The Oakland Police Department, worried about the abuse of robots by the police across the sea from San Francisco, abandoned a similar application for authorization to modify robots for extreme scenarios last month because of public protests. Racial conflict is a factor that the Oakland police have to consider. With a combined black-to-Hispanic population of more than 45%, it has the highest proportion in the San Francisco Bay area.

Despite its proximity to Silicon Valley, Auckland is the worst security city in the United States. Last year, the violent crime rate reached 75.5, well above the US average of 22.7. The epidemic situation of COVID-19 has aggravated social contradictions and public security problems. Auckland, a city of 430000 people, had 133 murders and nearly 600 shootings last year, the highest since 2006.

Since public security in America's big cities is so bad, why are so many people opposed to authorizing the police to use more advanced weapons to deal with attacks on suspects? Why is it so controversial that police robots are converted into weapons?

After the outbreak of the COVID-19 epidemic in the United States in 2020, social contradictions further intensified, and there were many large-scale ethnic riots. In curbing demonstrations, police across the United States clashed with demonstrators to varying degrees, and even used tear gas, smoke grenades and other violence measures.

The San Francisco police are allowed to use robots to kill suspects. Even if extreme scenarios are clearly defined, many people worry about whether the US police may abuse robots as cutting-edge technology to suppress public protests and demonstrations in the future. They are worried that there may be sci-fi scenes in which police robots stop demonstrators.

Elizabeth Joh, a professor at the University of Southern California Law School, believes that only two years after the Freud incident sparked global anti-racial discrimination protests, San Francisco's approval of the use of robots as weapons by the police will affect people's trust in law enforcement. "I certainly don't want to live in a world where police robots are used by police."

Although the San Francisco Council took the lead in approving the modification of robots by the police in the United States, the Dallas Police Department took the lead in using bomb disposal robots to attack and kill suspects in a mass shooting as early as 2016.

In July of that year, an army veteran who had been on the battlefield in Afghanistan, dissatisfied with American social and racial problems, killed five police officers and wounded nine civilians and police officers with a sniper rifle in downtown Dallas. this is the deadliest police attack in the United States since 9 / 11. After hours of confrontation with the gunman and fruitless negotiations, Dallas police installed a bomb on their bomb disposal robot MARCbot and remotely moved it to the vicinity of the suspect, killing the suspect who refused to lay down his weapon.

It is not controversial for Dallas police to kill a suspect, but the use of a remote-controlled robot has caused great controversy because it is the first time that US police have used a robot in the country. The Dallas police chief explained, "there was no other choice at that time. It was the only way to reduce casualties."

Prior to this, the US police have used robots to deal with suspects many times, but did not use robots to directly kill suspects. In 2013, the New Mexico SWAT used robots to infiltrate the suspect's room to detect, and in 2016, California police also used robots to negotiate and deliver supplies with the suspects to avoid sending negotiators. The existence of robots greatly reduces the risk that the police will directly face the suspect.

Robots have long been used on the battlefield. In fact, the robots sought by the San Francisco police have long been used by the US military on the battlefield. According to the 2011 book "changing roles of War" (The Changing Character of War), when American soldiers encounter the danger of an ambush in Iraq, they will let MARCbot robots explore the way first, and if they find the enemy, they will detonate the Claymore mines installed on them directly and remotely. The MARCbot robot, which sells for only $5000, has become the "favorite fall guy" of US soldiers because of its small size, light movement and low cost.

To some extent, drones are also combat robots. Since the war in Afghanistan, drones have shifted from reconnaissance to attack, and are widely used in long-range attacks by the US military. Since the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan in Nagorno-Karabakh in 2020, drones have become the main force of modern warfare. The Azerbaijani military sent a large number of bomb-carrying drones to carry out intensive attacks on Armenian ground forces and air defense systems, becoming an important means for them to win the war.

In October, five robotics companies, including Boston Dynamics, Agility Robotics and ANYbotics, signed a petition urging users not to use their robots for attack purposes. "adding weapons to remote-controlled or self-running robots will bring new risks to human beings and serious moral problems."

However, this petition is symbolic and not binding. The US military is already an important customer and source of funding for these robot companies, and Boston-powered robotic dogs are also used by the US military and police for logistics, reconnaissance and many other purposes. Boston Dynamics is powerless to stop the US military from converting its robot dog into a killer dog with weapons.

Compared with remote-controlled robots and drones, the more frightening threat comes from "AI robots", a new generation of fully automatic weapons equipped with artificial intelligence technologies such as visual recognition. Such robots or drones can automatically select targets and launch attacks based on pre-set programs without manual operation, relying on computing chips and a variety of sensors.

At present, there is no official record of such robots being put into use, but once they appear and put into use in the future, it is bound to shake the ethical principles of robots that cannot be used. With the continuous maturity of AI technology, people from all walks of life in Europe and the United States are worried that if no globally coordinated and effective measures are taken, the emergence of "AI robots" will only be a matter of time.

As early as 2013, experts from the scientific and legal circles established the International Committee on Robot Arms Control (International Committee for Robot Arms Control) to promote the peaceful use of robots and to adopt common regulatory measures for the R & D and production of robotic weapons. The group made it clear that "robots cannot be allowed to make decisions on their own."

In 2015, Hawking and other world-renowned scientists and artificial intelligence experts jointly issued an open letter warning that there may be an artificial intelligence arms race around the world in the future, urging the United Nations to issue a ban on offensive automatic weapons. These include representatives from Silicon Valley such as Tesla CEO Musk, Apple co-founder Wozniak and Google's DeepMind project leader.

"although illegal, the use of automated weapons will become a reality in the coming years, not decades," the letter said. this will pose a great risk to human society, and automated weapons will become the third weapons revolution after gunpowder and nuclear weapons. we must call on the United Nations to ban such weapons, just like chemical weapons. "

Welcome to subscribe "Shulou Technology Information " to get latest news, interesting things and hot topics in the IT industry, and controls the hottest and latest Internet news, technology news and IT industry trends.