Should the military use weapons guided by artificial intelligence?

Yes as long as we understand how and why the AI made the decisions it made as well as the ability to fully control and override and/or shut down at any time

Only in situations where it might be needed, such as counter-missiles that are already controlled by AI only during defensive situations.

Artificial intelligence as it stands, is a marketing term. The words "artificial intelligence" are not the same as the technology that would be used for military weapons.

Yes, as long as it is highly regulated and protected so we can prevent a takeover

For none kinetic results such as search and target acquisition, yes

Yes, provided they are tested and used under strict supervision.

No, absolutely not. We should not further trivialise killing or destruction, or allow programs with a limited, to non-existent understanding of nuance to facilitate it. If it has to be done, it must be done by a human being, who can understand the weight of their decisions.

Yes, provided they are strictly monitored to avoid unnecessary damage.

if the US, Russia, and China are all tripping over themselves to be the best at it, its pure evil. losers

Thi is such a nuanced question that can't be a yes or no.

Only when absolutely necessary to protect and preserve the immediate security of Australia.

Yes, but there should be extreme caution to their use.

No, I don’t trust its accuracy nor that humans will use it ethically.

Yes, but only after rigorous testing to prevent collateral damage.

Get out of other countries wars. Stop using our children for your dirty work

Yes, but it must always have human oversight and final human decision making, and it must not be used to target civilians or break international laws

Yes, as long as there is proof that the concept works without fault and no human loses a job over it.

Only if it's to protect Australia, not any other country

AI can aid the military's strategy but can not have sole control of weapon systems.

Yes, but with strict regulation to prevent ethical misuse.

Yes, but with strict regulation and accountability.

Yes, but with strict regulations to ensure ethical use and accountability.

Yes, provided the technology has passed vigorous testing requirements to ensure it functions safely.

No, this will lead to unintended downsides and consequences.

I think that whilst the implementation of AI into the armed forces is inevitable, and that because other countries will utilise the benefits of AI usage in the military, it is only a matter of time that an arms race for the militarisation of AI (much like the nuclear arms race during the cold war) will happen if it hasn't already and therefore we should not be left behind in terms of military capability with potential adversaries; I do not think that the militarisation of AI is a good thing. Firstly, it will only serve to make defence contractors and military industrial complex [who are…  Read more far removed from any harm, danger and suffering that their products cause] even more powerful, richer and influential than even in its current state, but it will remove the human factor from warfare. To explain what I mean by this... Would a hypothetical military AI be able to distinguish between combatant and non-combatant? How would it know not to fire on a surrendering combatant if it was programmed to kill said combattant? Would it even make sense to fight wars if AI can independently and autonomously identify, seek, attack and destroy human targets, therefore reducing the human involvement in war? To summarise, I think the militarisation of AI is inevitable, so it would be disadvantageous to not utilise it when a potential adversary would readily use it for their benefit, but that is not to say that's a good thing, quite the opposite as posed by my rhetorical questions from earlier.

Yes, but only if these weapons and how they are altered by AI is fully understood by those operating said weapons.

No, because there should remain a human factor in armed engagement