What do you think is the main reason for supporting the development and use of LAWS in battlefields?
|Cost of war will be cheaper to use LAWS than ROWS*||13.2%|
|Autonomous machines will make more ethical life/death decisions than humans||8.0%|
|LAWS will save human military personnel from psychological harm of war, such as PTSD||14.8%|
|LAWS will save human military personnel from physical harm of war||18.2%|
|Development of LAWS will lead to the development of useful, non-military technologies||7.4%|
|There are no valid reasons for developing and using LAWS over ROWS||31.7%|
What do you think is the main reason for rejecting the development and use of LAWS in battlefields?
|The risk of the technology falling into the wrong hands is too big||13.5%|
|Humans should always be the one to make life/death decisions (i.e. it is wrong for machines to make the decision)||33.7%|
|It is uncertain who will be responsible when things go wrong||11.5%|
|LAWS will kill more lives than it will save||7.7%|
|It is doubtful that LAWS technology of the near future will be technically robust and reliable enough to be trusted||19.8%|
|There are no valid reasons for rejecting the development and use of LAWS over ROWS||5.0%|
Survey conducted by UBC-based ORi. Full survey results and analysis can be found at www.openroboethics.org
* Remotely Operated Weapons Systems: weaponized systems in which a person in a remote location makes the decision