Lawand said that «uniquely human judgment» may be necessary for interpreting the rules of international humanitarian law and asked
if autonomous weapons systems could do that.
The report finds a lack of clarity as to who would be accountable
if an autonomous weapons system violates international law and notes that «proactive and future - oriented work in many fields is needed to counteract «the tendency of technological advance to outpace the social control of technology.»»
Not exact matches
If we populate our military with
autonomous weapons systems, our adversaries would adapt.
The next milestone for the international process concerns is the CCW's Fifth Review Conference on 12 - 16 December 2016, where states are expected to decide whether to continue the deliberations on lethal
autonomous weapons systems and,
if so, whether to formalize the mandate to a Group of Governmental Experts and increase the time dedicated to substantive deliberations in 2017.
The UK and US expressed support for the CCW process to address lethal
autonomous weapons systems but did not indicate
if that includes establishing a Group of Governmental Experts.
Earl Howe responded that the government believes that lethal
autonomous weapons systems «are not yet in existence and are not likely to be for many years,
if at all.»
But research and development activities should be banned
if they are directed at technology that can only be used for fully
autonomous weapons or that is explicitly intended for use in such
systems.