| Just a really dumb thought. 1) A military commander programs an AI squadron with the parameters of destroying a heavily defended military target with the parameters of minimizing casualties. 2) The AI veers the bombers 180 degrees off course and attacks a nearby town, purposely and irreparably destroying the only hospitals and drinking water production facilities in the region. Thousands of civilians are killed, and the loss of fresh water will cause many more casualties in the following weeks as people are no longer able to get drinking water. No military targets are hit. 3) The AI is examined. The reason it attacked the town is unclear but it is determined that it was not a malfunction or sabotage. Given that.... was a war crime actually committed? The AI cannot commit a crime, it's not a person. The people that ordered the attack specified that it should be attacking a valid military target. The people that created the AI certainly didn't intentionally put any mechanism in there to have the AI purposely commit war crimes. Given that, is it an actual crime? Or would it be closer to something like a natural disaster? ...to be clear I'm not a bright guy so I've probably missed something obvious... |