..."There has been far too little discussion of the moral calculus involved in using flying robots as tools of assassination. At the very least, the whole thing should leave us uneasy. Collateral damage — the killing of innocents — can be minimized but not eliminated. And even if only “bad” people are killed, this isn’t war as we’ve traditionally understood it. Drone attacks are more like state-sponsored homicide....
Just because we can deploy fleets of surveillance drones doesn’t mean we should. Not every incremental gain in security is worth the attendant surrender of privacy and freedom.
I realize that security cameras and debit-card records already keep a pretty good record of my daily movements. I also realize that my computer usage is like a diary of what’s on my mind. Privacy isn’t what it used to be. But this doesn’t mean we have to surrender the little we have left.
The idea of robots acting as guardians of public order has become a staple of dystopian fantasy — “Terminator,” “Minority Report,” “The Matrix.” It is our duty to keep that stuff in the movies, where it belongs. "
eugenerobinson@washpost.com
What's wrong with drones? The Vatican is making increasing use of them too.
ReplyDeleteThey come with a cone head, are infallible, remote controlled, shoot before asking any questions, and they WILL teach you faith and morals.
And when they have executed their mission, they come home to roost, following the example of Bernard Francis Cardinal Law.
ReplyDeleteOr get hacked by mullahs on their way.
Can they be programmed like me?
ReplyDelete