"In this incisive analysis, Jean-Baptiste Jeangène Vilmer argues that three things confuse the current debate on LAWS : the use of different names to describe the weapons in question (“killer robots,” “lethal autonomous weapon systems,” etc.), the inherently speculative nature of the debate, and differing definitions of “autonomy.” He then posits that “fully autonomous weapon systems” are a red herring, the moral argument against LAWS is too philosophically muddled to be effective, and that it is entirely unclear that LAWS will not abide with international humanitarian law. Finally, Vilmer argues that safeguards can be installed to regulate LAWS’ use." (Paul Scharre, Center for a New American Security)
This essay was first published in French as “Terminator Ethics : Faut-il Interdire les ‘Robots Tueurs’ ?”, Politique Etrangère, December 2014, p. 151-167.