38
Future AI weapons such as drones should have moral code, says former UK spy chief
(www.theguardian.com)
Plot twist: The moral code was vibe coded!
this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2026
38 points (95.2% liked)
Technology
85119 readers
4665 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
This "moral code" would only be a suggestion rather than a hard constraint, given how this current iteration of AI works.
Or how about we don't build fucking AI weapons?
Too late, drones with target matching are already daily killing civilians. Nobody is giving a shit about such bycatch.
No, we must build the Civilian Spine Shredder V1™ with a moral code so it can shred civilian spines morally.
Is the man suggesting the glorified search engine has a consciousness?
It ain't the killing machine that needs to have the morals, you twit.
Weapons and morals don't exactly go together. Oposing sides.
How about we use a very old established moral system.
I propose you shall not kill.
Funny enough, that line can also be interpreted as "thou shalt not murder" which really changes the meaning. I prefer the standard translation though as a pacifist.
AI with a conceptual model of what is and isn't fiction isn't anywhere near the main stream yet. Maybe we fix that before we give it access to real world actions. Then yeah also morality and ethics
Britain also refused to use the crossbow, or use submarines for a time because it was seen as unsporting or something similar.
This will be another of those.
This is an important conversation to have since I read the other day that the UK was supposedly taking humans out of the decision chain.
Should? That not a reassuring word
- A robot may not injure humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.
- A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
- A robot must obey the 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.
- Serve the public trust.
- Protect the innocent.
- Uphold the law.
- [CLASSIFIED]
Rule 0 tends to have… unanticipated side effects.
Like making us batteries or slaves. Yea.... Can't have an ai save us from ourselves