Charles ☭ Hutchins is a user on You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse.

Charles ☭ Hutchins @celesteh


There's been a lot of progress in the last year. The number of countries committed to the ban has doubled. Us Generals are speaking out against killer robots. The UK House of Lords is seeking public comment before setting policy for the Ministry of Defence, which is significant as the UK is one of the countries on the forefront of drone research.

Again, if you think this is a good idea, write a letter. If you're hopeless, please at least don't impede others.


First, welcome to Mastodon!

Second, banning nukes isn't impossible. The Soviet Union offered bilateral disarmament to Reagan and he turned them down. Most people on earth want to see them banned.

Third, most countries now ban land mines. Progress is possible.

If you don't support it or think it's hopeless, please don't get in the way of people who are working on it!

@marco Treaties banning things are not technical problems or solutions. Things we've banned include biological weapons and torture of POWs. The latter has not been adhered to as closely as one would hope, but bio weapons have not been used since the treaty.
The Geneva conventions ban whole classes of weapons from gas to anything that intends to cause blindness. This is not technical or tactical, but moral and social.

My home timeline bouncing up and down like an animated gif

politics, prison Show more

politics, prison Show more

If you don't *get* web accessibility yet, here is a challenge.

Go on your phone and enable the screen-reader, should be under the accessibility menu.

Now close your eyes and try to do all the things you would normally do. Use your social media apps, check some news sites, do some email, go on mastodon (in apps, in browser). casual stuff.

See if you can do this for a whole evening. Just an evening. No peeking.

Now go back and imagine how what your site/app is like for someone who does it 24/7

@sanspoint Biohacking is for able-bodied cis men, amirite?

I find it interesting that putting a magnet in your finger or an NFC chip in your hand is "biohacking," but having an insulin pump, a pacemaker, or a birth control implant isn't.

so long, sean spicer. your incompetence was a great service to the american people and to the whole world. and a source of endless entertainment.

Spicey barely made it six months. Can't wait to see who has even less integrity than him.

If you live in the , parliament is seeking letters from interested organisations and individuals about the use of AI in military applications, including killer robots. You can send a letter and it be included in the consultation. More information here:

It's so much easier to act now, before things get out of hand.

Autonomous weapons are dangerous. We don't want uncontrolled armed robots running around. This is literally the stuff of science fiction. Even people in government of the most aggressive countries can easily see how this could go wrong.
We do have the power to stop these through international effort. There's a good chance your representative has never even heard of this (but will see the problems very quickly). Writing a letter can really help.

You can ask your country to support the proposed ban on killer robots. If you are from a country that is not likely to own these weapons soon, banning them is in your national interest so that they are not used against you.
If you are from a rich, aggressive country, it's still possible to ask your government to sign the treaty. Meaningful oversight is in the best interest of everyone.

The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots is a group lead by veterans of the anti-landmine campaigns. They are working within the UN, to line up opposition to killer robots and try to ban them by treaty. This would be like banning nuclear weapons before anyone had used them. It might be possible to prevent a killer robot catastrophe before it happens.

@celesteh "ai trained on military and policing data sure seems to turn racist, let's give it flying guns"

Killer robots who make inappropriate target decisions or wrongly drop bombs could commit war crimes, but without war criminals - nobody would be responsible. The military could deploy these weapons knowing nobody will have to answer if they turn racist or genocidal or target journalists or children, etc.

Drones currently carry small conventional weapons, but nay kind of weapon can be attached to them. There is currently a treaty in place that bans small nuclear weapons, but the treaty has been eroded by actions from both the US and Russia. There is no reason that drones couldn't carry nukes. And there's no reason autonomous drones couldn't also carry nukes. Indeed, there are reasons some people like the idea.