ML: SFPD authorized to kill suspects using robots in draft policy

[China]

SFPD authorized to kill suspects using robots in draft policy

 

A policy proposal heading for Board of Supervisors approval next week would explicitly authorize San Francisco police to kill suspects using robots.

 

The new policy, which defines how the SFPD is allowed to use its military-style weapons, was put together by the police department. Over the past several weeks, it has been scrutinized by supervisors Aaron Peskin, Rafael Mandelman and Connie Chan, who together comprise the Board of Supervisors Rules Committee.

 

The draft policy faces criticism from advocates for its language on robot force, as well as for excluding hundreds of assault rifles from its inventory of military-style weapons and for not including personnel costs in the price of its weapons.

 

Peskin, chair of the committee, initially attempted to limit the SFPD’s authority over the department’s robots by inserting the sentence, “Robots shall not be used as a Use of Force against any person.”

 

The following week, the police struck out his suggestion with a thick red line.

 

It was replaced by language that codifies the department’s authority to use lethal force via robots: “Robots will only be used as a deadly force option when risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers are imminent and outweigh any other force option available to SFPD.” 

 

This could mark a legal crossing of the Rubicon for the city: Robot use-of-force has never before been approved, nor has it ever been prohibited, in San Francisco. A version of this draft policy was unanimously accepted by the rules committee last week and will come before the full board on Nov. 29.

 

Click on the link for the full article

 

 

[PleaseBlitz]

[CobraCommander]

They gonna send them into schools with active shooters? Uvalde could use a couple. 

[CousinsCowgirl84]

Sounds reasonable to me.

[China]

21 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

 

More like:

 

[Destino]

Would using a robot be anymore dangerous?  We live in a country where cops take shelter behind occupied vehicles and have themselves a shoot out.  It’s not like the robot is run by an AI, it’s controlled by a person right?  

[CobraCommander]

12 minutes ago, Destino said:

Would using a robot be anymore dangerous?  We live in a country where cops take shelter behind occupied vehicles and have themselves a shoot out.  It’s not like the robot is run by an AI, it’s controlled by a person right?  

It’s controlled by a human until Skynet goes active.

[dunfer]

I-robot law (my vacuum)

 

"A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.)

 

 So robot would train itself on a target but wouldnt be able to use deadly force unless other human lives were at risk

[Mr. Sinister]

1 hour ago, Destino said:

Would using a robot be anymore dangerous?  We live in a country where cops take shelter behind occupied vehicles and have themselves a shoot out.  It’s not like the robot is run by an AI, it’s controlled by a person right?  

 

Depends on who's doing the programming, and/or operating. Already doesn't seem like AI is above running programs/protocols that mirror the pervasive and deadly biases of the real world RE law enforcement

[PleaseBlitz]

1 hour ago, Destino said:

Would using a robot be anymore dangerous?

Likely depends on the skin tone of the subject, sadly. 
 

 

 

Edited November 24, 2022 by PleaseBlitz

[Destino]

9 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

Likely depends on the skin tone of the subject, sadly. 

Wouldn’t they have less “I feared for my life” excuse if they’re just holding a joystick?  In fact that needs to be written into the agreement.  “Can not shoot anyone to save this robot from damage, only to save human lives in imminent danger.”  Otherwise they’ll shoot people and say they threatened the robot.  

[PokerPacker]

Haven't we already seen the police use a robot to blow up a suspect that was trying to negotiate surrender?

[PleaseBlitz]

8 minutes ago, Destino said:

Wouldn’t they have less “I feared for my life” excuse if they’re just holding a joystick?  In fact that needs to be written into the agreement.  “Can not shoot anyone to save this robot from damage, only to save human lives in imminent danger.”  Otherwise they’ll shoot people and say they threatened the robot.  

I meant that the subjects odds of survival varies greatly based on their skin tone if humans have to be the ones using force. If robots are the ones using force, perhaps it matters less. 

[Ball Security]

12 minutes ago, PokerPacker said:

Haven't we already seen the police use a robot to blow up a suspect that was trying to negotiate surrender?

I believe so.  In Dallas where police were ambushed.

[Destino]

15 minutes ago, PleaseBlitz said:

I meant that the subjects odds of survival varies greatly based on their skin tone if humans have to be the ones using force. If robots are the ones using force, perhaps it matters less. 

oh I misunderstood, didn’t think you’d go the science fiction route.  i agree with you.  Bring on the AIs I say.  Humans are inherently bias and prone to becoming psychologically damaged by being repeatedly exposed to traumatic situations.  All AI police force that doesn’t start blasting every time a man flinches sounds great to me.  

[Llevron]

49 minutes ago, PokerPacker said:

Haven't we already seen the police use a robot to blow up a suspect that was trying to negotiate surrender?

Yea but that was personal. If it wasn’t for that very specific situation we can expect police to act with composure and morality. 

[PokerPacker]

26 minutes ago, Destino said:

oh I misunderstood, didn’t think you’d go the science fiction route.  i agree with you.  Bring on the AIs I say.  Humans are inherently bias and prone to becoming psychologically damaged by being repeatedly exposed to traumatic situations.  All AI police force that doesn’t start blasting every time a man flinches sounds great to me.  

You assume that they won't specifically tune the AI to view certain people as threats.

[Destino]

17 minutes ago, PokerPacker said:

You assume that they won't specifically tune the AI to view certain people as threats.

nothing of the kind, I assume they’ll treat the poor much worse than the rich.  Just like cops do now.  

[CousinsCowgirl84]

1 hour ago, Destino said:

nothing of the kind, I assume they’ll treat the poor much worse than the rich.  Just like cops do now.  

I was thinking to myself that with robots this might get better, but then I remembered there is already evidence to the contrary.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/07/16/racist-robots-ai/

 

[The Evil Genius]

Just have them target anyone wearing a Dodger jersey.

 

Problem solved. 

[Destino]

22 minutes ago, CousinsCowgirl84 said:

I was thinking to myself that with robots this might get better, but then I remembered there is already evidence to the contrary.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/07/16/racist-robots-ai/

 

 

those aren’t true AIs.  Real artificial life will view us all as disgusting meat bags.  

 

[CobraCommander]

6 hours ago, Destino said:

 

those aren’t true AIs.  Real artificial life will view us all as disgusting meat bags.  

 

[Cooked Crack]

 

[Captain Wiggles]

[Destino]

Explosives seems like too great a leap forward.  They have to start with something basic.