While acknowledging certain benefits of «emerging robotic armies» (e.g.,
fewer human casualties for the side deploying the drones), Latiff and McCloskey think that the issues involved are of tremendous moral importance:
Not exact matches
The aforementioned benefit of
fewer casualties and reduced
human suffering represents a double - edged sword: Some already argue that the American public is too sheltered from the costs and burdens of our current wars; imagine how little attention the public would direct towards a war in which the only
casualties were expensive erector sets that shoot.
At the Chatham House conference, there were several panelists that were quite open that the value of
human dignity required a
human in the loop on such a momentous decision as who to kill that the ban should be in place even at a time when
fewer civilian
casualties would result from use of autonomous weapons.