Daniel Suarez: The kill decision shouldn't belong to a robot

Translator: Joseph Geni Reviewer: Morton Bast

翻译人员: Binglei Shea 校对人员: Ning Zhang

I write fiction sci-fi thrillers,

我是写科幻惊悚小说的，

so if I say "killer robots,"

所以如果我说"机器人杀手"

you'd probably think something like this.

你也许会这么想。

But I'm actually not here to talk about fiction.

但我其实不打算在这里谈论小说。

I'm here to talk about very real killer robots,

我在这里要谈论非常真实的杀手机器人，

autonomous combat drones.

自主作战无人机。

Now, I'm not referring to Predator and Reaper drones,

现在，我不是指“捕食者”和“死神无人机”，

which have a human making targeting decisions.

他们是由人类决定攻击目标的。

I'm talking about fully autonomous robotic weapons

我说的是完全自主的机器人武器

that make lethal decisions about human beings

它们自己作出攻击

all on their own.

人类的决定。

There's actually a technical term for this: lethal autonomy.

这实际上有一个技术术语: 致命的自主权。

Now, lethally autonomous killer robots

现在，致命的自主机器人杀手

would take many forms -- flying, driving,

有许多形式——飞行、 驾驶、

or just lying in wait.

或只是埋伏。

And actually, they're very quickly becoming a reality.

实际上，他们正在很快成为现实。

These are two automatic sniper stations

这些都是两个自动的狙击地点

currently deployed in the DMZ between North and South Korea.

目前部署在朝鲜和韩国之间非军事区。

Both of these machines are capable of automatically

这些机器都能够自动

identifying a human target and firing on it,

识别人类目标并向其射击，

the one on the left at a distance of over a kilometer.

左边的那个可以在一公里外（就发现目标）。

Now, in both cases, there's still a human in the loop

现在，这两种情况下，仍有一个人类在控制

to make that lethal firing decision,

来下这一致命射击的决定，

but it's not a technological requirement. It's a choice.

但它不是一项技术要求。它是一种选择。

And it's that choice that I want to focus on,

我重点关注的正是这一选择，

because as we migrate lethal decision-making

因为随着我们致命决策权的迁移

from humans to software,

从人到软件，

we risk not only taking the humanity out of war,

我们甘冒风险不只让人们远离战争

but also changing our social landscape entirely,

而且也在改变我们的整个社会格局，

far from the battlefield.

使其远离战场。

That's because the way humans resolve conflict

这是因为人类解决冲突的方式

shapes our social landscape.

决定了我们社会的格局。

And this has always been the case, throughout history.

在整个历史长河中一直是如此。

For example, these were state-of-the-art weapons systems

例如，这些都是最先进的武器系统

in 1400 A.D.

在公元 1400 年

Now they were both very expensive to build and maintain,

现在建造和维护它们都很昂贵

but with these you could dominate the populace,

但有了这些，你就可以主宰民众，

and the distribution of political power in feudal society reflected that.

同时也反映了封建的社会中政治权力的分配。

Power was focused at the very top.

权力集中在最顶端。

And what changed? Technological innovation.

什么改变了？技术创新。

Gunpowder, cannon.

火药，加农炮。

And pretty soon, armor and castles were obsolete,

很快，装甲和城堡都已过时，

and it mattered less who you brought to the battlefield

你带谁上战场已经不那么重要

versus how many people you brought to the battlefield.

重要的是你带了多少人上战场。

And as armies grew in size, the nation-state arose

并且随着军队的组织的扩大，为了满足国防上的

as a political and logistical requirement of defense.

政治和后勤要求，民族国家出现了。

And as leaders had to rely on more of their populace,

作为领导人不得不依靠更多的民众，

they began to share power.

他们开始分享权力。

Representative government began to form.

代表政府开始形成。

So again, the tools we use to resolve conflict

再次，我们用来解决冲突的工具

shape our social landscape.

塑造了我们社会的格局。

Autonomous robotic weapons are such a tool,

自主机器人武器就是这样一个工具，

except that, by requiring very few people to go to war,

除此之外，通过只需要很少的人去打仗，

they risk re-centralizing power into very few hands,

他们的风险在于权力可能重新回到少数人手里，

possibly reversing a five-century trend toward democracy.

可能扭转五个世纪的民主潮流。

Now, I think, knowing this,

现在，我想，知道这个，

we can take decisive steps to preserve our democratic institutions,

我们可以采取果断措施，维护我们的民主机构，

to do what humans do best, which is adapt.

做人类擅长的事情，这是适应。

But time is a factor.

但时间是一个因素。

Seventy nations are developing remotely-piloted

七十个国家正在自主发展遥控

combat drones of their own,

无人作战机，

and as you'll see, remotely-piloted combat drones

如你所见，遥控作战无人机是

are the precursors to autonomous robotic weapons.

自主机器人武器的前提。

That's because once you've deployed remotely-piloted drones,

这是因为一旦您已经部署了遥控无人作战机，

there are three powerful factors pushing decision-making

有三个强大的因素迫使人类

away from humans and on to the weapon platform itself.

把决策权交给武器平台本身。

The first of these is the deluge of video that drones produce.

第一是无人机拍摄的大量视频。

For example, in 2004, the U.S. drone fleet produced

例如，2004 年，美国无人机梯队拍摄了

a grand total of 71 hours of video surveillance for analysis.

总计 71 个小时的视频监控可供分析。

By 2011, this had gone up to 300,000 hours,

2011 年，这已经达 300,000 小时

outstripping human ability to review it all,

超过了人类的审查能力，

but even that number is about to go up drastically.

但即使这一数字会猛烈地增长。

The Pentagon's Gorgon Stare and Argus programs

五角大楼的“戈尔贡凝视”（Gorgon Stare）和守卫程序

will put up to 65 independently operated camera eyes

还将把 65个 独立的照相机眼睛

on each drone platform,

安装在每个无人机平台上，

and this would vastly outstrip human ability to review it.

这将远远超过人类的审查能力。

And that means visual intelligence software will need

这就需要视觉情报软件

to scan it for items of interest.

去扫描它感兴趣的目标。

And that means very soon

这意味着很快

drones will tell humans what to look at,

无人机将告诉人类要看什么

not the other way around.

不是其他方式。

But there's a second powerful incentive pushing

但还有第二个的强大动力迫使

decision-making away from humans and onto machines,

人类把决策权交给机器。

and that's electromagnetic jamming,

这就是电磁干扰，

severing the connection between the drone

它会切断无人飞机和操控者

and its operator.

之间的联系。

Now we saw an example of this in 2011

现在我们看到的例子发生在 2011 年

when an American RQ-170 Sentinel drone

当美国 RQ-170 哨兵无人机

got a bit confused over Iran due to a GPS spoofing attack,

由于GPS欺骗攻击，在伊朗上空而发生混乱，

but any remotely-piloted drone is susceptible to this type of attack,

但任何遥控无人飞机都极易受这种类型的攻击，

and that means drones

这就意味着无人机

will have to shoulder more decision-making.

将不得不承担更多的决策。

They'll know their mission objective,

他们就会知道他们的使命目标

and they'll react to new circumstances without human guidance.

他们在无人操纵的情况下有自主应对新情况的能力。

They'll ignore external radio signals

他们会忽略外部的无线电信号

and send very few of their own.

只发出极少量的无线信号。

Which brings us to, really, the third

这就引出了，第三个

and most powerful incentive pushing decision-making

最强大的诱因促使我们

away from humans and onto weapons:

将决策权交给武器自身：

plausible deniability.

貌似合理的推脱。

Now we live in a global economy.

现在我们生活在一个全球化的经济大潮中。

High-tech manufacturing is occurring on most continents.

高科技制造业在大多数大陆上发生。

Cyber espionage is spiriting away advanced designs

网络间谍活动正在将先进的设计

to parts unknown,

带到未知世界，

and in that environment, it is very likely

在那种环境下，它是很有可能

that a successful drone design will be knocked off in contract factories,

一个成功的无人驾驶飞机设计在授权工厂被停工，

proliferate in the gray market.

导致其在灰色市场量产。

And in that situation, sifting through the wreckage

在这种情况，即使仔细筛查

of a suicide drone attack, it will be very difficult to say

无人机自杀式攻击的残骸，

who sent that weapon.

也很难说谁发射了这个武器。

This raises the very real possibility

这就引起了非常现实的可能性

of anonymous war.

匿名的战争。

This could tilt the geopolitical balance on its head,

这将导致地缘政治失衡并倾向一头，

make it very difficult for a nation to turn its firepower

使一个国家很难将其火力

against an attacker, and that could shift the balance

对准攻击者，这可能会令21 世纪的平衡

in the 21st century away from defense and toward offense.

从防御走向进攻。

It could make military action a viable option

它能使军事行动成为可行的选择

not just for small nations,

不只是那些小国家

but criminal organizations, private enterprise,

甚至犯罪组织、 私人企业、

even powerful individuals.

甚至是强大的个人都可以这么做。

It could create a landscape of rival warlords

它可以引起军阀割据的混战，

undermining rule of law and civil society.

破坏法治和文明社会。

Now if responsibility and transparency

现在如果责任和透明度

are two of the cornerstones of representative government,

是代议制政府的两个基石

autonomous robotic weapons could undermine both.

自主机器人武器可能同时摧毁它们。

Now you might be thinking that

现在你可能会想，

citizens of high-tech nations

高科技的国家的公民

would have the advantage in any robotic war,

在任何机器人的战争中占有优势

that citizens of those nations would be less vulnerable,

这些国家的公民将不再那么脆弱，

particularly against developing nations.

尤其是针对发展中国家。

But I think the truth is the exact opposite.

但事实是正好相反。

I think citizens of high-tech societies

我认为高科技社会的公民

are more vulnerable to robotic weapons,

面对机器人武器更加脆弱，

and the reason can be summed up in one word: data.

原因可以用一个词概括： 数据。

Data powers high-tech societies.

数据掌控着高科技社会。

Cell phone geolocation, telecom metadata,

手机定位，电信的元数据，

social media, email, text, financial transaction data,

社会媒体、 电子邮件、 文本、 金融交易数据，

transportation data, it's a wealth of real-time data

交通数据，那么多丰富的实时数据

on the movements and social interactions of people.

关于个人的动向和社交关系。

In short, we are more visible to machines

简而言之，对于机器而言，

than any people in history,

我们比历史上任何人更显而易见，

and this perfectly suits the targeting needs of autonomous weapons.

这完全符合了自主武器瞄准的需要。

What you're looking at here

现在你正在看到的

is a link analysis map of a social group.

是某一社会群体的关系分析图。

Lines indicate social connectedness between individuals.

线表示人与人之间的社会联系。

And these types of maps can be automatically generated

这类型的地图，基于现代人留下的数据追踪，

based on the data trail modern people leave behind.

可以自动生成。

Now it's typically used to market goods and services

现在它通常用于市场商品和服务

to targeted demographics, but it's a dual-use technology,

有针对性的人口统计数据，但这种技术有双重用途，

because targeting is used in another context.

因为目标被用于另一种情境。

Notice that certain individuals are highlighted.

请注意那些突出显示的个人。

These are the hubs of social networks.

这些都是社交网络的枢纽。

These are organizers, opinion-makers, leaders,

这些都是组织者、 决策者、 领袖、

and these people also can be automatically identified

这些人也可以进行通过他们的通讯模式

from their communication patterns.

被自动识别出来

Now, if you're a marketer, you might then target them

现在，如果你是营销人员，您可能瞄准他们

with product samples, try to spread your brand

用产品的样本，试图传播您的品牌

through their social group.

通过他们的社群。

But if you're a repressive government

但是如果你是一个专制的政府

searching for political enemies, you might instead remove them,

寻找政治的敌人，你反而可能会想要拔掉这些眼中钉，

eliminate them, disrupt their social group,

消灭他们，从而扰乱他们的社团

and those who remain behind lose social cohesion

而那些留下的人将失去社会凝聚力

and organization.

和组织。

Now in a world of cheap, proliferating robotic weapons,

在一个机器人武器便宜又泛滥的世界里，

borders would offer very little protection

国界的保护微乎其微，

to critics of distant governments

无法防御远方政府批评者

or trans-national criminal organizations.

或跨国犯罪组织。

Popular movements agitating for change

鼓动改革的民众运动

could be detected early and their leaders eliminated

可以在早期即被发现，

before their ideas achieve critical mass.

他们的领袖在向大众充分宣传他们的观点之前就会被消灭。

And ideas achieving critical mass

向大众充分宣传其观点

is what political activism in popular government is all about.

正是政治激进主义政府所追求的。

Anonymous lethal weapons could make lethal action

匿名致命武器能让致命行动

an easy choice for all sorts of competing interests.

成为各种相互竞争利益的一种最简单的选择。

And this would put a chill on free speech

这将会令民主的核心——言论自由

and popular political action, the very heart of democracy.

和民众政治运动受到限制。

And this is why we need an international treaty

这就是为什么我们需要一项国际条约

on robotic weapons, and in particular a global ban

关于机器人武器的禁令

on the development and deployment of killer robots.

禁止全球开发和部署机器人杀手。

Now we already have international treaties

现在我们已经有国际条约

on nuclear and biological weapons, and, while imperfect,

关于核武器和生化武器，虽然不尽完善，

these have largely worked.

这些很大程度上起了作用。

But robotic weapons might be every bit as dangerous,

但机器人武器可能一样危险

because they will almost certainly be used,

因为它们几乎可以肯定将会被使用，

and they would also be corrosive to our democratic institutions.

他们也会侵蚀我们的民主机构。

Now in November 2012 the U.S. Department of Defense

2012 年 11 月，美国国防部

issued a directive requiring

直接要求

a human being be present in all lethal decisions.

所有致命决定都必须有人类参与。

This temporarily effectively banned autonomous weapons in the U.S. military,

这暂时有效地阻止了自主武器在美国军队中的使用

but that directive needs to be made permanent.

但该指令需要永久有效。

And it could set the stage for global action.

它可以为全球立法行动铺路。

Because we need an international legal framework

因为，我们需要

for robotic weapons.

一个针对于机器人武器的国际法律框架。

And we need it now, before there's a devastating attack

我们现在就需要这样的法律，用以防止一个具有破坏性攻击

or a terrorist incident that causes nations of the world

或一个恐怖袭击使得世界各国

to rush to adopt these weapons

在完全不顾及后果的前提下，

before thinking through the consequences.

就急于采用这些武器。

Autonomous robotic weapons concentrate too much power

自主机器人武器集中了太多的权利

in too few hands, and they would imperil democracy itself.

集中在太少人手中，他们将会危及民主本身。

Now, don't get me wrong, I think there are tons

现在，别误会我，我觉得这些非武装的民用无人机

of great uses for unarmed civilian drones:

用途很多：

environmental monitoring, search and rescue, logistics.

环境监测、 搜索和救援，物流。

If we have an international treaty on robotic weapons,

如果我们有一项关于机器人的武器国际条约，

how do we gain the benefits of autonomous drones

我们如何从自主无人机和自主车上获得好处

and vehicles while still protecting ourselves

同时还保护我们自己

against illegal robotic weapons?

免受非法机器人武器的攻击？

I think the secret will be transparency.

我认为秘密会变得透明化。

No robot should have an expectation of privacy

任何机器人都不应该

in a public place.

在公众领域有隐私。

(Applause)

（掌声）

Each robot and drone should have

每个机器人和无人驾驶飞机都应该

a cryptographically signed I.D. burned in at the factory

在工厂内被烙上一个加密的身份信息

that can be used to track its movement through public spaces.

可以用来对其在公共领域内动向的跟踪。

We have license plates on cars, tail numbers on aircraft.

我们的汽车有车牌，飞机尾部有编号。

This is no different.

这没有什么不同。

And every citizen should be able to download an app

每个公民应能够下载应用程序

that shows the population of drones and autonomous vehicles

能够显示通过他们周围公共空间的

moving through public spaces around them,

无人机和自主车的数量

both right now and historically.

不论现在还是过去。

And civic leaders should deploy sensors and civic drones

领导者应部署传感器和民用无人驾驶飞机

to detect rogue drones,

来检测流氓无人机，

and instead of sending killer drones of their own up to shoot them down,

而不是发送能够击落他们的杀手无人机，

they should notify humans to their presence.

应该通知人们这些无人机的存在。

And in certain very high-security areas,

在某些非常高安全等级的地区，

perhaps civic drones would snare them

或许民用无人机可以将他们拖到

and drag them off to a bomb disposal facility.

一个设有炸弹设施处理掉。

But notice, this is more an immune system

但请注意，这更象一个免疫系统，

than a weapons system.

而不是武器系统。

It would allow us to avail ourselves of the use

这样，它将使我们能够利用

of autonomous vehicles and drones

自主车辆和无人驾驶飞机的好处

while still preserving our open, civil society.

同时仍然保留我们开放的公民社会。

We must ban the deployment and development

我们必须禁止部署与发展

of killer robots.

机器人杀手。

Let's not succumb to the temptation to automate war.

我们不会屈服于自动化战争的诱惑。

Autocratic governments and criminal organizations

独裁政府和犯罪组织

undoubtedly will, but let's not join them.

毫无疑问的会屈服，让我们不要加入他们。

Autonomous robotic weapons

自主机器人武器

would concentrate too much power

集中了太多的权力

in too few unseen hands,

在太少看不见的手中，

and that would be corrosive to representative government.

那将是侵蚀我们的代议制政府。

Let's make sure, for democracies at least,

让我们保证，至少为了民主的理由，

killer robots remain fiction.

让机器人杀手只存在于小说里吧。

Thank you.

谢谢。

(Applause)

（掌声）

Thank you. (Applause)

谢谢。（掌声）