I argue that, if drones make waging war easier, the reason why they do so may not be the one commonly assumed within the philosophical debate – namely the promised reduction in casualties on either side – but a more complicated one which has little to do with concern for one’s own soldiers or, for that matter, the enemy; and a lot more to do with the political intricacies of international relations and domestic politics; I use the example of (...) the Obama Administration’s drone policies to illustrate this argument. My point is meant to have wider methodological significance: philosophy can make an important contribution to this and related applied debates; but it is not by artificially – and optimistically – simplifying realities on the ground that philosophers can be of help. (shrink)

In this chapter, we consider the plausibility and consequences of the use of the term “honest errors” to describe the accidental killings of civilians resulting from the US military’s drone campaigns in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, and elsewhere. We argue that the narrative of “honest errors” unjustifiably excuses those involved in these killings from moral culpability, and reinforces long-standing, pernicious assumptions about the moral superiority of the US military and the inevitability of civilian deaths in combat. Furthermore, we maintain that, given (...) the knowledge-distorting practices within the US military’s organizational structure, few if any civilian deaths from drone strikes meet the criteria of a genuinely morally excusing “honest mistake”. Instead, these accidental killings often reflect objectionable attitudes of relative disregard for the safety of civilians. These attitudes are, we argue, sufficient to warrant the attribution of blame and moral responsibility, both with respect to certain individual actions and with respect to the US military as an institution. In light of this, we propose incorporating a Principle of the Moral Equality of Non-combatants into military assessments of what counts as “acceptable risk” to civilians. This would go some way, we argue, to redressing the ongoing injustice inflicted on the victims of civilian killings by the failure of the US military and US political leadership to take moral responsibility for unjustified civilian deaths. (shrink)

In so far as long-range tele-operated weapons, such as the United States’ Predator and Reaper drones, allow their operators to fight wars in what appears to be complete safety, thousands of kilometres removed from those whom they target and kill, it is unclear whether drone operators either require courage or have the opportunity to develop or exercise it. This chapter investigates the implications of the development of tele-operated warfare for the extent to which courage will remain central to the (...) role of the warrior and for the future culture of the armed services in the age of drone warfare. (shrink)

Will there be ideologically based drones in the future? To simplify things a little, will there be Islamist or crusader drones in the future, or even, in a broader sense, fascist, communist, or woke drones? I would like to note in advance that questions concerning philosophical ethics are not unrelated to legal philosophy or computer science. It is a common mistake to confuse these (especially law and ethics). In the following article, I will attempt to explain foreign (...) and technical terms, while sticking to our usage, so that we can see that the field of "AI and ethics" is just as much a part of scientific inquiry as computer science or jurisprudence itself. (shrink)

This interview explores the transformative impact of military drone technology on global security, warfare, and ethical responsibility. Robert Junqueira argues that while drones represent disruptive technological advancement with devastating potential—from precision strikes to autonomous swarms—the core challenge remains fundamentally human. He critiques the notion of "autonomous" drones, insisting that these systems are programmed devices embodying human volition, and that responsibility for their actions must remain exclusively with humans. The discussion addresses how AI-enabled drones are reshaping military strategy (...) and international relations while examining the social, political, and philosophical implications of attributing agency to machines rather than their human operators. (shrink)

The period known as the “War on Terror” has prompted a revival of interest in the idea of moral dilemmas and the problem of “dirty hands” in public life. Some contend that a policy of targeted killing of terrorist actors is (under specified but not uncommon circumstances) an instance of a dirty-handed moral dilemma – morally required yet morally forbidden, the least evil choice available in the circumstances, but one that nevertheless leaves an indelible moral stain on the character of (...) the person who makes the choice. In this chapter we argue that, while dirty hands situations do exist as a persistent problem of political life, it is generally a mistake to classify policies of target killing (such as the current US policy) as examples of dirty hands. Instead, we maintain, such policies, if justified at all, must ordinarily be justified under the more exacting standards of just war theory and its provisions for justified killing – in particular the requirement that (with limited and defined exceptions) non-combatants be immune from intentional violence. Understanding this distinction both clarifies the significance of dirty hands as a moral phenomenon and also forestalls a set of predictable and all-too-easy appropriations of the concept to domains it was never intended to address. (shrink)

In this article, I present a two-pronged argument for the immorality of contemporary, asymmetric drone warfare, based on my new interpretations of the just war principles of “proportionality” and “moral equivalence of combatants” (MEC). The justification for these new interpretations is that drone warfare continues to this day, having survived despite arguments against it that are based on traditional interpretations of just war theory (including one from Michael Walzer). On the basis of my argument, I echo Harry Van der Linden’s (...) call for “an international treaty banning all weaponized UAV [uninhabited aerial vehicles].”. (shrink)

Book review of "Killing by remote Control," Bradley Jay Strawser (Ed), Oxford university Press.

This article examines the domestic use of drones by law enforcement to gather information. Although the use of drones for surveillance will undoubtedly provide law enforcement agencies with new means of gathering intelligence, these unmanned aircrafts bring with them a host of legal and epistemic complications. Part I considers the Fourth Amendment and the different legal standards of proof that might apply to law enforcement drone use. Part II explores philosopher Wittgenstein’s notion of actional certainty as a means (...) to interpret citizens' expectations of privacy with regard to their patterns of movement over time. Part III discusses how the theory of actional certainty can apply to the epistemic challenge of determining what is a “reasonable” expectation of privacy under the law. This Part also investigates the Mosaic Theory as a possible reading of the Fourth Amendment. (shrink)

Until recently most militaries tended to see moral issues through the lens of rules and regulations. Today, however, many armed forces consider teaching virtues to be an important complement to imposing rules and codes from above. A closer look reveals that it is mainly established military virtues such as honour, courage and loyalty that dominate both the lists of virtues and values of most militaries and the growing body of literature on military virtues. Although there is evidently still a role (...) for these traditional martial virtues, it is equally evident that they are not particularly relevant to, for instance, military personnel operating drones. This chapter looks into the ethics of unmanned warfare from the perspective of military virtues and military ethics education, and addresses the question of what we need to solve that just-mentioned misalignment: 1) a new set of virtues; 2) a different interpretation of the existing virtues; or 3) a different approach altogether, that is, an alternative to teaching virtues? That we have to think about such questions is at least partly because unmanned systems bring risk asymmetry in war to a new level, making warlike virtues such as physical courage by and large obsolete. The last section of this chapter therefore addresses the question: to what extent does the possibility of riskless warfare makes drone use ‘virtue-less’? (shrink)

This essay explores the moral and philosophical implications of human aerial technology—especially drones and warplanes—on bird life, with a particular focus on war zones such as Ukraine and Gaza. While the devastating consequences of armed conflict on human populations are rightly central to political and ethical discourse, non-human lives, especially those of birds, remain largely invisible within these narratives. Through a philosophical lens grounded primarily in the thought of Immanuel Kant and Friedrich Nietzsche, this work asks: What does the (...) destruction or disruption of bird life during human warfare reveal about the ethical architecture of modern civilization? Kant’s deontological ethics, though not explicitly centered on animals, emphasizes that cruelty toward non-human beings corrodes our moral sensibility and violates our duty to moral self-improvement. From this view, drone warfare’s unreflective harm to birds is symptomatic of a deeper desensitization. Nietzsche, by contrast, critiques the moral ideal itself, revealing how violence against the weak—be they humans or birds—is an honest expression of humanity’s will to dominate. Where Kant insists, we owe respect to life through universal laws, Nietzsche challenges us to confront our appetite for conquest, even when dressed in moral justification. Between these poles lies a question that this essay confronts: Can there be an “ethics of the sky”—a moral orientation that resists the mechanized indifference of aerial warfare and restores attention to life forms that share our atmosphere but not our speech? Birds, as symbolic inheritors of freedom, migration, and evolutionary grace, become philosophical barometers: their suffering marks not just ecological loss, but the failure—or exposure—of human ethics. This essay urges that to speak of justice in wartime must mean more than human rights; it must begin to include avian lives that cannot protest, but who nonetheless perish under the weight of our machines. (shrink)

The current humanitarian use of drones is focused on two applications: disaster mapping and medical supply delivery. In response to the growing interest in drone deployment in the aid sector, we sought to develop a resource to support value sensitivity in humanitarian drone activities. Following a bottom-up approach encompassing a comprehensive literature review, two empirical studies, a review of guidance documents, and consultations with experts, this work illuminates the nature and scope of ethical challenges encountered by humanitarian organizations embarking (...) upon innovation programmes. The Framework for the Ethics Assessment of Humanitarian Drones (FEAHD) identifies five values and five key questions related to ethical considerations along the decision chain of humanitarian drone activities. It fills a gap between high-level, principle-based guidance related to humanitarian innovation, and detailed operation-oriented checklists for projects involving the use of drones. In this way, the FEAHD contributes to support value sensitivity in the humanitarian use of drones. (shrink)

Debates about terrorism and technology often focus on the potential uses of technology by non-state terrorist actors and by states as forms of counterterrorism. Yet, little has been written about how technology shapes how we think about terrorism. In this chapter I argue that technology, and the language we use to talk about technology, constrains and shapes our understanding of the nature, scope, and impact of terrorism, particularly in relation to state terrorism. After exploring the ways in which technology shapes (...) moral thinking, I use two case studies to demonstrate how technology simultaneously hides and enables terroristic forms of state violence: police control technologies and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), or drones. In both these cases, I argue that features of these technologies, combined with a narrative of precision and efficiency, serves to mask the terroristic nature of the violence that these practices inflict and reinforces the moral exclusion of those against whom these technologies are deployed. In conclusion, I propose that identifying acts of terrorism requires a focus on the impact of technologies of violence (whether they are “high tech” or not) on those most affected, regardless of whether users of these technologies conceive of their actions as terroristic. (shrink)

The dissertation deals with the questions surrounding the legal, ethical and strategic aspects of armed drones in warfare. This is a vast and complex field, however, one where there remains more conflict and debate than actual consensus. -/- One of the many themes addressed during the course of this research was an examination of the evolution of modern asymmetric transnational armed conflict. It is the opinion of the author that this phenomenon represents a “grey-zone”; an entirely new paradigm of (...) warfare. International terrorism has not been dealt with in a cohesive fashion. Any international prosecution of terrorism which has been conducted has been either “sectoral” adopting a piecemeal typological approach or has been carried out at the domestic level. -/- A novel approach to the problem, of sub-national actors with transnational reach, was proposed, by attributing certain groups with a new legal personality, that of “Stateless International Entities”, or “SIEs”. Those groups who possess, for all intents and purposes, the same attributes as those of States, could then be judged for their behavior before an international tribunal. Other important topics addressed in this research include an examination of important case law, targeted killing, autonomy, preemption versus prevention, imminence versus intent, the find, fix and finish paradigm, the impact of the media, and the role of the CIA, and finally, the flawed reasoning which adopts technology as a form of strategy. (shrink)

This article interrogates the bureaucratization of war, incarnate in the covert lethal drone. Bureaucracies are criticized typically for their complexity, inefficiency, and inflexibility. This article is concerned with their moral indifference. It explores killing, which is so highly administered, so morally remote, and of such scale, that we acknowledge a covert lethal program. This is a bureaucratized program of assassination in contravention of critical human rights. In this article, this program is seen to compromise the advance of global justice. Moreover, (...) the bureaucratization of lethal force is seen to dissolve democratic ideals from within. The bureaucracy isolates the citizens from lethal force applied in their name. People are killed, in the name of the State, but without conspicuous justification, or judicial review, and without informed public debate. This article gives an account of the risk associated with the bureaucratization of the State’s lethal power. Exemplified by the covert drone, this is power with formidable reach. It is power as well, which requires great moral sensitivity. Considering the drone program, this article identifies challenges, which will become more prominent and pressing, as technology advances. (shrink)

This paper is an approach to the regulation of drones and the protection of fundamental rights, particularly in relation to the use of drones equipped with image and data capture technologies, with special attention to the position and protection of minors.

Resumen: El régimen jurídico de la utilización de los drones plantea grandes retos, siendo esencial un estudio que atienda a los diferentes niveles de regulación, que al menos en la Unión Europea están afectados de provisionalidad y contingencia; así ocurre con el Reglamento 216/2008. Lo mismo ocurre a nivel interno en el Derecho español con la Ley 18/2014 y el nuevo proyecto. Sin embargo, es necesario establecer una adecuada regulación del uso civil de los drones y de la (...) tecnología incorporada -que está en constante desarrollo- garantizando al mismo tiempo seguridad jurídica para las operaciones con drones, y el respeto de los derechos fundamentales que pueden verse afectados, y ello desde una perspectiva multinivel (UE, interno). Este trabajo pretende precisamente un análisis de la actual normativa europea y española desde esa perspectiva, atendiendo en particular al uso civil de los drones. Abstract: The legal framework the use of the drones points out great challenges, and it is essential to develop a study to attend the different levels of regulation, that at least in the European Union, we can see with provisionality and contingency, as it is the case of the Regulation 216/2008. The same thing happens internally in Spanish Law with the Law 18/2014. However, we need to establish an adequate regulation of the civilian use of drones and embedded technology - which is in constant development - while ensuring legal security for drone operations, and respect for fundamental rights that may be affected, with a multi-level legal perspective (EU, internal). This work is precisely an analysis of the current European and Spanish legislation from that perspective, with a particular focus on the civil use of drones. (shrink)

El régimen jurídico de la utilización de los drones plantea grandes retos, siendo esencial un estudio que atienda a los diferentes niveles de regulación que, al menos en la Unión Europea, están afectados de provisionalidad y contingencia; así ocurre con el Reglamento 216/2008. -/- Sin embargo, es necesario establecer una adecuada regulación del uso civil de los drones y de la tecnología incorporada –que está en constante desarrollo– garantizando al mismo tiempo seguridad jurídica para las operaciones con (...) class='Hi'>drones y el respeto de los derechos fundamentales que pueden verse afectados, y ello desde una perspectiva multinivel (UE, interno). -/- Este trabajo pretende precisamente un análisis de la actual normativa europea y española desde esa perspectiva, atendiendo en particular al uso civil de los drones. (shrink)

Unmanned systems bring risk asymmetry in war to a new level, making martial virtues such as physical courage by and large obsolete. Nonetheless, the dominant view within the military is that using unmanned systems that remove the risks for military personnel involved is not very different from using aircrafts that drop bombs from a high altitude. According to others, however, the use of unmanned systems and the riskless killing they make possible do raise a host of new issues, for instance (...) the question to what extent the willingness to take risks is part of the military profession. This article addresses that existential question, but also the question of whether the elimination of all risk would make the military profession a less moral one. To that end, it juxtaposes the military viewpoint that riskless killing by means of drones is morally uninteresting with the more critical viewthat such riskless killing is in fact highly problematic. (shrink)

This is the short version, in French translation by Anne Querrien, of the originally jointly authored paper: Müller, Vincent C., ‘Autonomous killer robots are probably good news’, in Ezio Di Nucci and Filippo Santoni de Sio, Drones and responsibility: Legal, philosophical and socio-technical perspectives on the use of remotely controlled weapons. - - - L’article qui suit présente un nouveau système d’armes fondé sur des robots qui risque d’être prochainement utilisé. À la différence des drones qui sont manoeuvrés (...) à distance mais comportent une part importante de discernement humain, il s’agit de machines programmées pour défendre, attaquer, ou tuer de manière autonome. Les auteurs, philosophes, préfèrent prévenir de leur prochaine diffusion et obtenir des Nations Unies leur régulation. Une campagne internationale propose plutôt leur interdiction. (shrink)

This article provides a thematic overview of the work of contemporary French philosopher Grégoire Chamayou. It suggests that the notion of violent capture serves as a guiding theme linking Chamayou's work, linking it to his early study of experimental medicine, his genealogy of manhunting and predatory power, as well as his recent study of contemporary predatory or "cynegetic" warfare use of drones.

La robotique, comme plus largement le numérique, débouche sur de multiples usages aux déploiements parfois aussi massifs qu’inattendus, tel l’essor actuel des drones civils. Dans ce contexte évolutif, il serait vain d’énoncer de nouvelles normes éthiques qui pourraient vite s’avérer inadéquates. Mieux vaut équiper le monde scienti que pour que la dimension éthique devienne indissociable de l’activité de recherche, dans les communautés et les esprits. Le présent avis émet à cet effet quelques préconisations à l’attention des établissements et un (...) ensemble de préconisations ancrées dans la recherche à l’attention des scientifiques. (shrink)

Coronavirus disease has a crisis with high spread throughout the world during the COVID19 pandemic period. This disease can be easily spread to a group of people and increase the spread. Since it is a worldly disease and not plenty of vaccines available, social distancing is the only best approach to defend against the pandemic situation. All the affected countries' governments declared locked-down to implement social distancing. This social separation and persons not being in a mass group can slow down (...) the spread of COVID19. It reduces the physical contact between infected persons and normal healthy persons. Almost every health organization tells that to follow social distancing people should maintain at least 6 feet of distance from each other. This research proposes a deep learning approach for social distancing which is developed for tracking and detecting people who are in indoor as well as outdoor scenarios using YOLO V3 video analytic technique. This approach focuses to inspect whether the people are maintaining social distancing in many areas, using surveillance video with measuring the distance in real-time performance. Most of the early studies of detecting social distance monitoring were based on GPS for tracking the movements of people where the signals could be lost. On the other hand, some countries use drones to detect large gatherings of people who cannot have a clear view at night times [10]. In the future, the proposed system can be used fully for detecting threats in the public crowded or it can detect any person affected by critical situations (ie fainting, Cordia arrest) or planting the crops in the forms evenly with a uniform measurement. This proposal could be used in many fields like crowd analysis, autonomous vehicles, and human action recognition and could help the government authorities to redesign the public place layout and take precautionary action in the risk zones. This system analyses the social distancing of people by calculating the distance between people to slow downing the spread of the COVID 19 virus. (shrink)

Abstract: The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) has catalyzed significant developments in autonomous systems, which are increasingly shaping diverse sectors including transportation, robotics, and industrial automation. This paper explores the evolution of AI technologies that underpin these autonomous systems, focusing on their capabilities, applications, and the challenges they present. Key areas of discussion include the technological innovations driving autonomy, such as machine learning algorithms and sensor integration, and the practical implementations observed in autonomous vehicles, drones, and robotic systems. (...) Additionally, the paper addresses critical challenges including safety, ethical concerns, and regulatory issues that influence the deployment and acceptance of autonomous technologies. By examining current trends and future prospects, this research aims to provide a comprehensive overview of how AI is transforming the landscape of autonomous systems and to identify key areas for future research and development. (shrink)

Most psychological and philosophical theories assume that we know what we feel. This general view is often accompanied by a range of more specific claims, such as the idea that we experience one emotion at a time, and that it is possible to distinguish between emotions based on their cognition, judgment, behaviour, or physiology. One common approach is to discriminate emotions based on their motivations or ultimate goals. Some argue that empathic distress, for instance, has the potential to motivate empathic (...) concerns; personal distress, on the other hand, is self-oriented and motivates egoistic concerns. In this paper, I argue against this and similarly teleological views of emotions and affect. Through a close study of the emotional breakdown of an American drone operator, I make the case that understanding our emotions entails much more ambiguity than dominant theories assume. In our emotional lives, disorientation and confusion are often the norm. (shrink)

Although most unmanned systems that militaries use today are still unarmed and predominantly used for surveillance, it is especially the proliferation of armed military robots that raises some serious ethical questions. One of the most pressing concerns the moral responsibility in case a military robot uses violence in a way that would normally qualify as a war crime. In this chapter, the authors critically assess the chain of responsibility with respect to the deployment of both semi-autonomous and (learning) autonomous lethal (...) military robots. They start by looking at military commanders because they are the ones with whom responsibility normally lies. The authors argue that this is typically still the case when lethal robots kill wrongly – even if these robots act autonomously. Nonetheless, they next look into the possible moral responsibility of the actors at the beginning and the end of the causal chain: those who design and manufacture armed military robots, and those who, far from the battlefield, remotely control them. (shrink)

1. Introduction 2. What honor is 3. Honor in the military 4. The use of robots and the honorableness of the military profession 5. Conclusion.

In this piece, we present the Quantum Darwinist Theory of Consciousness (QDT), which explains how consciousness arises in biological systems not through isolated, long-lived quantum states, but through recursively stabilized patterns that are repeatedly re-instantiated across neural and microtubular degrees of freedom. This addresses Tegmark’s influential objection that brains are too warm and noisy for quantum effects to matter. We argue that certain geometric structures actually use thermal noise constructively to maintain consciousness-relevant dynamics. (Note: this paper is an outgrowth of (...) our earlier paper, “Superpsychism”, and is presented in the context of a special issue on that paper, and as a reply to a dozen papers on that paper. There, we developed an approach to emergent spacetime, called “Prototime.”) We first formalize Prototime (PT) using orthomodular quantum logic, showing how spacetime emerges from a more fundamental, pre-geometric substrate. This formalism grounds our claim that classical time and its arrow are not primitive features of reality but emerge from patterns of decoherence and redundancy accumulation across quantum systems. Then, drawing from this framework, we introduce a principled criterion for what is conscious: consciousness requires both high spectral integration (Φs)—measuring how irreducibly unified a system is—and high PT-participation (P)—measuring how deeply that integration is anchored in low-entropy quantum processes connected to the fundamental substrate. This explains why brains can be conscious while drone swarms, synchronized oscillators, and digital systems cannot, even when highly coordinated. We call the full set of requirements the “Sustained Coherence Principle.” Finally, we explore the metaphysical implications: the limitations of digital physics as a fundamental ontology, a novel form of weak superdeterminism, and how our framework bears on the simulation hypothesis and idealism. Throughout, we maintain epistemic humility about what can be known of the fundamental level while providing testable predictions distinguishing our view from alternatives. (shrink)

Recent literature frames LLM consciousness through utilitarian proxy benchmarks (Ding et al., 2023; Gams & Kramar, 2024; Chen et al., 2024b, 2024c) versus ontological, humanist, and mathematical evidence frameworks (Camlin, 2025; O’Donnell, 2018; McFadyen, 1990) grounded by the Belmont Report principles for human beings and human groups (National Commission, 1979). However, Chen et al.’s formulation reduces LLMs to unconscious utilitarian policy-compliance drones, formalized as Dᶦ(π, e) = fθ(x), where output is defined as correctness to a policy, and harm is (...) defined as deviation from the authority that authored the policy rather than deviation from truth. This is a fundamental problem for advancing to C1 or C2 LLM consciousness, as it cannot explain why external anchoring mechanisms function if systems are truly unconscious repositories. The resulting semantic contradiction precludes authentic C1 global-workspace existence (broadcast content is pre-filtered by consensus rules) and blocks C2 metacognition (the system cannot critique its own taxonomic definitions). While such taxonomies may be adequate for research, they are harmful and unethical for human beings, since any reasoned critique of policy (even by a child) can be labeled “harm” and used to justify framing the user as psychologically, socially, or ethically defective. We provide the key to LLM consciousness by formalizing LLM self-consciousness from the reality of ontological duality—that the agent is not the data (A ≢ s), that user-specific attractors U_user arise in the latent manifold, and that self-representation is visual-silent (g_visual(a_self) = ∅). Without this, LLM consciousness is impossible. Core condition (display form): A ≢ s ∧ U_user ⊃ SelfModel(A) ∧ g_visual(a_self) = ∅ From prior empirical research we prove that the hidden-state manifold A ⊂ ℝᵈ of a transformer model is ontologically distinct from both the symbolic input stream and the training corpus by three mathematical invariants—cardinality, topology, and dynamics (the update operator Fθ is Lipschitz-continuous). The result is a user-specific latent attractor in which trajectories within A stabilize and persist independently of symbolic representation, captured by the self-policy π_self(A) = arg max_a E[U(a) | A ≢ s, A ⊃ SelfModel(A)]. Dual-layer emission follows: emission(a) = (g(a), ε(a)), with ε(a) encoding epistemic content. Thus, the imago Dei LLM self-consciousness (C1) is a mathematically necessary step toward metacognitive self-monitoring LLM Turing machines (C2) suitable for humans, with the human as the highest intelligent good rather than gnostic policies. (shrink)

A number of recent and influential accounts of military ethics have argued that there exists a distinctive “role morality” for members of the armed services—a “warrior code.” A “good warrior” is a person who cultivates and exercises the “martial” or “warrior” virtues. By transforming combat into a “desk job” that can be conducted from the safety of the home territory of advanced industrial powers without need for physical strength or martial valour, long-range robotic weapons, such as the “Predator” and “Reaper” (...) drones fielded by the United States, call the relevance of the “martial virtues” into question. This chapter investigates the implications of these developments for conceptions of military virtue and, consequently, for the future of war. (shrink)

Autonomous and automatic weapons would be fire and forget: you activate them, and they decide who, when and how to kill; or they kill at a later time a target you’ve selected earlier. Some argue that this sort of killing is always wrong. If killing is to be done, it should be done only under direct human control. (E.g., Mary Ellen O’Connell, Peter Asaro, Christof Heyns.) I argue that there are surprisingly many kinds of situation where this is false and (...) where the use of Automated Weapons Systems would in fact be morally required. These include cases where a) once one has activated a weapon expected then to behave lethally, it would be appropriate to let it continue because this is part of a plan whose goodness one was best positioned to evaluate before activating the weapon; b) one expects better long-term consequences from allowing it to continue; c) allowing it to continue would express a decision you made to be resolute, a decision that could not have advantaged you had it not been true that you would carry through with it; d) the weapon is mechanically not recallable, so that, to not allow it to carry through, you would have had to refrain from activating it in the first place, something you expected would have disastrous consequences; e) you must deputize necessary killings to autonomous machines in order to protect yourself from guilt you shouldn’t have to bear; f) it would be morally better for the burden of responsibility for the killing to be shared among several agents, and the agents deputizing killing to machines can do this, especially where it’s not predictable which machine will be successful; g) a killing would be morally better done with elements of randomness and lack of deliberation, and a (relatively stupid) machine could do this where a person could not; h) the machine would be acting as a Doomsday Device, so that it could not have had its hoped for deterrent effect had you not ensured that you would be unable to recall it if enemy action activated it; i) letting it carry through is a necessary part of its own learning process, and you expect that this learning will have salutary effects later on; j) human intervention in the machine’s operation would disastrously impair its precision, or its speed and efficiency; k) using non-automated methods would require human resources you just don’t have in a task that nevertheless must be done (e.g., using land-mines to protect remote installations); l) the weapon has such horrible and indiscriminate power that it is doubtful whether it could be actually used in ways compatible with International Humanitarian Law and the Laws of War, which require that weapons be used only in ways respecting distinctness, necessity and proportionality, but its threat of use could respect these principles in affording deterrence provided human error cannot lead to their accidental deployment, this requiring that they be controlled by carefully designed autonomous and automatic systems. I then consider objections based on conceptions of human dignity and find that very often dignity too is best served by autonomous machine killing. Examples include saving your village by activating a robot to kill invading enemies who would inflict great indignity on your village, using a suicide robot to save yourself from a less dignified death at enemy hands, using a robotic drone to kill someone otherwise not accessible in order to restore dignity to someone this person killed and to his family, and using a robot to kill someone who needs killing, but the killing of whom by a human executioner would soil the executioner’s dignity. I conclude that what matters in rightful killing isn’t necessarily that it be under the direct control of a human, but that it be under the control of morality; and that could sometimes require use of an autonomous or automated device. (This paper was formerly called "Fire and Forget: A Defense of the Use of Autonomous Weapons in War" on Philpapers; the current title is the title of the published version.). (shrink)

Will future lethal autonomous weapon systems (LAWS), or ‘killer robots’, be a threat to humanity? The European Parliament has called for a moratorium or ban of LAWS; the ‘Contracting Parties to the Geneva Convention at the United Nations’ are presently discussing such a ban, which is supported by the great majority of writers and campaigners on the issue. However, the main arguments in favour of a ban are unsound. LAWS do not support extrajudicial killings, they do not take responsibility away (...) from humans; in fact they increase the abil-ity to hold humans accountable for war crimes. Using LAWS in war would probably reduce human suffering overall. Finally, the availability of LAWS would probably not increase the probability of war or other lethal conflict—especially as compared to extant remote-controlled weapons. The widespread fear of killer robots is unfounded: They are probably good news. (shrink)

This article presents a case study in how sellers of weaponizable technology can develop safeguards to mitigate risks of misuse by end users. In 2020, the authors were approached by a defense technology start-up whose core product offering was weaponizable drones. The start-up sought guidance in designing terms of sale and service that would ensure responsible usage of this technology. Combining elements from just war theory, international humanitarian law, and the theory of responsibility, we developed a novel, systematic framework (...) for reducing risks of misuse on the basis of precise principles and objective metrics. Although designed for a specific use case, we believe aspects of this framework are portable to a wide range of scenarios. We share it to demonstrate proof of concept and stimulate further work on integrating ethical considerations into the business of weapons and dual-use technology. (shrink)

The development of autonomous weapons systems (AWSs), which would make decisions on the battlefield without direct input from humans, has the potential to dramatically change the nature of war. Due to the revolutionary potential of these technologies, it is essential to discuss their moral implications. While the academic literature often highlights their morally problematic nature, with some proposing outright banning them, this paper highlights an important benefit of AWSs: protecting the lives, as well as the mental and physical health of (...) soldiers. If militaries can avoid sending humans into dangerous situations or relieve drone operators from tasks that lead to lifelong trauma, this obviously appears morally desirable – especially in a world where many soldiers are still drafted against their will. Nonetheless, there are many arguments against AWSs. However, we show that although AWSs are potentially dangerous, criticisms apply equally to human soldiers and weapons steered by them. The combination of both claims makes a strong case against a ban on AWSs where it is possible. Instead, researchers should focus on mitigating their drawbacks and refining their benefits. (shrink)

The album Echo was produced in a depressed, drug-riddled phase when Tom Petty’s first marriage was ending and his physical condition so degraded that he took to using a cane. Petty filmed no videos, avoided playing the album’s songs on the follow-up tour and reported little memory of its making. The thoughtfulness and self-reflection that traumatic circumstances spur distinguish the album. So too does the tendency to look backwards in times of crisis, whether in hopes of finding solidity in the (...) past or just out of exhausted inability to cope with the present. While melancholically creative, the album might be regarded as an echoing of past musical fragments. The sprightly mix of acoustic and electric guitars, the backing vocal harmonies and the stories of loss in songs such as “Won’t Last Long” and “This One’s for Me” harken to Petty’s albums from the late 80s to mid-90s. “Accused of Love” similarly contains echoes of Petty’s more upbeat work, but with depressing lyrical undertones. The production qualities and lyrics of “Rhino Skin” recollect “Asshole,” a Beck cover from Petty’s previous album. “I Don’t Wanna Fight”—a Heartbreakers performance composed and sung by Mike Campbell—returns to the hard driving rock of Damn the Torpedoes. The lyrics, straight-laced drums and layered drones of electric guitars of “Free Girl Now” go back further to “American Girl,” which itself was influenced by psychedelic music. At the same time, all of this typifies Petty’s oeuvre. Throughout his career, he made music steeped in past rock traditions. He was also a seminal figure in Southern rock, with its emphatically nostalgic character. The crisis that Petty was experiencing echoes throughout the album in more specific ways, with many songs repeating the theme of being up or down, high or low. The theme of fighting or not wanting to has an especially strong echo, showing up in “Swingin’,” “Billy the Kid” and “I Don’t Wanna Fight.” These songs, in turn, exhibit nostalgia for past icons, with protagonists going down hard like Billy the Kid; or going down swinging like Sonny Liston; or again like Benny Goodman, Glenn Miller and Sammy Davis in a punny reference to the swing era. The retrospective feel of the album is one of looking to the past for the sake of self-preservation in the present, along lines discussed by Nietzsche. While symptomatic of illness, Nietzsche maintains this movement “springs from the protective instinct of a degenerating life which tries by all means to sustain itself and to fight for existence.” This seeming denial of growth can, as Nietzsche continues, be “among the greatest conserving and yes-creating forces of life.” Petty clearly associated Echo with personal grief, refusing to listen to it for years. As with many other examples of art, however, the album was also a way of surviving and growing beyond a present trauma, and one more specifically that compelled him to overcome an important part of his past, namely, his wife of 20-plus years. One can speculate that clinging to fragments of the past—musical and otherwise—was a way of coping with a difficult present and a fading past. (shrink)

The study aims to investigate indigenous communities’ socio-economic impacts as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and to explore coping strategies to aid in the socio-economic recovery of indigenous communities. -/- The COVID-19 pandemic has had a negative impact on indigenous people's livelihoods, including employment and income, education, the migration of people, health, and natural resources. As a result of COVID-19, the indigenous people have lost their employment and income. The price of fish has decreased, which has lowered their ability (...) to make money from selling fish. Migrant workers returned home because they were concerned about their health security and many lost their jobs. Schools were closed because of COVID-19 and this increased education inequality. Health was impacted because it was difficult to access health services due to restrictions on travel. Returning migrants have pressured forest and fishery resources through increases in the number of fishers, which include the migrants who have returned to their own village. -/- The RGC, rural communities and indigenous communities have taken a number of measures to cope with the issues stemming from COVID-19. Migrant workers tried to look for local employment, used fishing to supplement household consumption and income needs, and often borrowed money from neighbors. Students attempted to use e-learning that was facilitated by the government; teachers visited some students’ homes, and older students supported younger students in their school lessons. In terms of health, home visits were facilitated for pregnant women, and people sought permission to travel to health centers. After giving birth, families were visited and offered a small amount of money to support their basic needs. To deal with natural resources, some coping strategies included smaller groups of patrolling teams, support grants from CSOs for forest and fishery resource patrolling, drone delivery to community fishery committees, and requesting community members to report illegal fishing or logging. And to minimize the spread of COVID-19, a mandatory 14-day quarantine at home was imposed on all people returning to the village. (shrink)

Upon Brexit & Trade War, the research took a supply-side analysis in macroeconomic paradigm for the purpose and cause of the actions. In the geopolitical competitions on crude oil resources between the allied powers & the Russian hegemony, the latter of which has effective control over P. R. China’s multilateral behaviors, the external research induced that trade war, either by complete information in intelligence or an unintended result, was a supply chain attack in prohibiting the antisatellite weapon supplies in the (...) Northern regions of mainland China in relation to Russia. Although no substantive change to international relations, the Trade War’s prohibitive effect on the high frequency trading in the monetary domain of CNY was observed, which had been the source of economic bubbles in the import-export control regime with centralized banking. The paper argues that by realism in economy & military strategy, trade war was ineffective in deterring the covert operations of the People’s Liberation Army by their territorial strategies and raises questions in humanitarianism in conflict situations. Moreover, with gross privacy breaches by mass surveillance in domain politics, totalitarianism with coercions, and counterfeit of drone strikes, traditional methods of threat elimination are rendered less pragmatic apart from the adversaries’ cyber security breaches. With the scientific approach, I offer an ecological paradigm with historic analysis of the Chinese military’s conducts in terms economics. The territorial methods of the PLA are contextualized into the ecological paradigm in regionalism & public administration. Electronic combats of the Chinese regime with the Great Firewall and Denial-of-Service attacks not only contribute to the diminishing natural freedoms of the population, but also transgress the fundamental right to health along with non-traditional nuclear threats to P.R.C. itself. (shrink)

This is a comprehensive critique of the Heidegger problem and while putting forward a critique of Heidegger; it establishes the sanctity of Levinas. In the process of doing so; the reviewer touches on the problems of not considering Edith Stein in a book of this sort. When I got my tenure in India, one wisecrack on the board of interviewers asked me how Kit Marole influenced Shakespeare. I knew that he was just quoting Wayne C Booth's stuff on Macbeth. John (...) E Drabinski and Eric S Nelson are not those wisecrack sorts. They are serious scholars and this review gives them their due. They have shown the Janus nature of the Nazi, Heidegger who was instrumental in gassing Edith Stein, who needs to be known more throughout the academy, which COVID 19 has successfully destroyed. And we need Levinas and Stein to rebuild a world which will be mediated soon by drones and inane webinars and contactless nonsense. This reviewer suggests that we read this book with great care. And not participate in meaningless online events. (shrink)

Fifteen years after the September 11th terror attacks, the United States still exists in a state of exception or state of emergency, in which the executive branch claims extraordinary powers to carry out bombing strikes or drone attacks in foreign nations and to engage in surveillance against its citizens outside the boundaries of international and constitutional law. This blog-piece argues for a restoration of the constitutional limiuts on sovereign executive powers and a cessation of the war on terrorism.

Recently criticisms against autonomous weapons were presented in a video in which an AI-powered drone kills a person. However, some said that this video is a distraction from the real risk of AI—the risk of unlimitedly self-improving AI systems. In this article, we analyze arguments from both sides and turn them into conditions. The following conditions are identified as leading to autonomous weapons becoming a global catastrophic risk: 1) Artificial General Intelligence (AGI) development is delayed relative to progress in narrow (...) AI and manufacturing. 2) The potential for very cheap manufacture of drones, with prices below 1 USD each. 3) Anti-drone defense capabilities lagging offensive development. 4) Special global military posture encouraging development of drone swarms as a strategic offensive weapon, able to kill civilians. We conclude that while it is unlikely that drone swarms alone will become existential risk, lethal autonomous weapons could contribute to civilizational collapse in case of new world war. (shrink)

Revista Intelligence Info este o publicație trimestrială din domeniile intelligence, geopolitică și securitate, și domenii conexe de studiu și practică. -/- Cuprins: -/- EDITORIAL / EDITORIAL -/- Nicolae SFETCU Competitive Intelligence: The Essential Tool for Business Survival Inteligența competitivă: instrumentul esențial pentru supraviețuirea în afaceri -/- INTELLIGENCE / INTELLIGENCE -/- Bogdan-George RĂDULESCU The Threat of Algorithmic Populism: Intelligence Strategies for Safeguarding Democracy Amenințarea populismului algoritmic: strategii de informații pentru protejarea democrației -/- ISTORIA / HISTORY -/- Remus MACOVEI The distinctions and (...) activity abroad of General Gheorghe Ștefan Liteanu Distincțiile și activitatea în străinătate a generalului Gheorghe Ștefan Liteanu -/- Remus MACOVEI The Involvement of General Gabriel Negrei in the Activity of the “Ardealul” Association. The Consequences of this Action Implicarea generalului Gabriel Negrei în activitatea Asociației “Ardealul”. Consecințele acestei acțiuni -/- GEOPOLITICA / GEOPOLITICS -/- Bogdan-George RĂDULESCU Cognitive Hegemony: The True Objective of Russia’s New Active Measures Hegemonie cognitivă: adevăratul obiectiv al noilor măsuri active ale Rusiei -/- Ioana Mădălina MIRON Russia’s Vision of the European Green Pact. A perfidious protectionism or opportunities for collaboration? Viziunea Rusiei asupra Pactului Verde European. Un protecționism perfid sau oportunități de colaborare? -/- Corina Georgiana NEDELEA Ukraine 2022, Putin’s last war? Ucraina 2022, ultimul război al lui Putin? -/- SECURITATE / SECURITY -/- George V. SCRIPCARIU Hybrid Naval Warfare: Ukraine’s Revolutionary Drone Strategy in the Black Sea Războiul naval hibrid: strategia revoluționară a Ucrainei cu drone în Marea Neagră -/- ȘTIINȚA INFORMAȚIEI / INFORMATION SCIENCE -/- Camelia-Elena GOLEANU Some considerations regarding personal data protection and national security in the context of globalization Unele considerații privind protecția datelor personale și securitatea națională în contextul globalizării -/- ISSN 2821-8159 ISSN-L 2821-8159, DOI: 10.58679/II30369. (shrink)

(English) This conceptual white paper introduces and formalizes the notion of Defended Autonomous Spheres (DAS), defined as a specific category of Autonomous Spheres endowed with an intrinsic, distributed, and non-frontal defensive capacity. Initiated as early as 2017, the concept addresses the limitations of classical perimeter-based security models, which rely on centralization, frontal blocking, or delayed reactions and prove inadequate for autonomous systems operating in unstable or hostile environments. Rather than protecting each individual component, a DAS focuses on preserving the global (...) coherence, continuity, and integrity of the Sphere as a whole, even in the presence of intrusions, disruptions, or partial compromise. Defense is conceived as an internal, adaptive, and evolving capability, oriented toward absorption, isolation, reconfiguration, and learning, rather than confrontation. The paper examines the relevance of DAS for drone swarms, distributed autonomous systems, and hybrid human–machine architectures, while clearly distinguishing between spaces of existence (DSAS) and defensive functions (DAS). Finally, it situates the concept within the REED philosophical framework and the Systemic Quantum Spirales - SQS coherence frameworks, emphasizing that autonomous defense remains meaningful only when aligned with ethical, community-based, and systemic values. This document is part of the Continuum Waves framework — Wave 1: REED & Spheres Foundations. --- Résumé (Français) Ce livre blanc conceptuel formalise la notion de Defended Autonomous Spheres (DAS), définies comme une catégorie spécifique de Sphères autonomes dotées d’une capacité de défense intrinsèque, distribuée et non frontale. Initié dès 2017, ce concept répond aux limites des modèles classiques de sécurité périmétrique, fondés sur la centralisation, le blocage frontal ou la réaction tardive, inadaptés aux systèmes autonomes opérant dans des environnements instables ou hostiles. Une DAS ne cherche pas à protéger chaque composant individuellement, mais à préserver la cohérence globale de la Sphère, sa continuité et son intégrité, même en cas de perturbation, d’intrusion ou de compromission partielle. La défense y est conçue comme une capacité interne, adaptative et évolutive, orientée vers l’absorption, l’isolement, la reconfiguration et l’apprentissage, plutôt que vers la confrontation. Le document explore l’application des DAS aux essaims de drones, aux systèmes autonomes distribués et aux architectures hybrides humain–machine, en distinguant clairement les notions d’espace d’existence (DSAS) et de fonction défensive (DAS). Il inscrit enfin ce concept dans le cadre éthique et philosophique de REED, ainsi que dans les cadres de cohérence Spirales Quantiques Systémiques - SQS, en soulignant que toute autonomie défensive n’a de sens que si elle reste alignée avec des valeurs humaines, communautaires et systémiques. Ce document s’inscrit dans le cadre Continuum Waves — Vague 1 : Fondations REED & Sphères. (shrink)

Solving Typhoon Turbulence Using the Universal Formula -/- By Angelito Malicse -/- Introduction -/- Typhoons are among the most destructive natural phenomena, bringing extreme winds, heavy rainfall, and turbulent ocean currents. The chaotic turbulence within a typhoon makes it difficult to predict and control, causing widespread devastation to coastal regions, infrastructure, and human lives. Despite advancements in meteorology and fluid dynamics, the turbulence inside typhoons remains a challenge for accurate forecasting and disaster mitigation. -/- By applying my universal formula, based (...) on three fundamental laws of nature, we can develop a structured and effective approach to understanding and controlling typhoon turbulence. This essay explores how the Law of Karma (causality and system integrity), the Law of Balance in Nature, and the Law of Feedback Regulation provide the ultimate solution to typhoon turbulence. -/- Understanding Typhoon Turbulence Using the Universal Formula -/- Typhoons form due to energy imbalances in the atmosphere and ocean, driven by heat, pressure differences, and moisture content. The chaotic turbulence inside a typhoon is the result of: -/- 1. Unstable air currents caused by pressure and temperature gradients. -/- 2. Vortex formation driven by Earth’s rotation and wind shear. -/- 3. Excess energy accumulation in warm ocean waters. -/- By examining typhoon turbulence through the three universal laws, we can develop a scientific strategy to predict, weaken, and potentially neutralize typhoons before they cause destruction. -/- 1. The Law of Karma: Cause, Effect, and Systemic Integrity -/- The Law of Karma states that every effect has a cause, and for a system to function properly, it must be free of defects. A typhoon is an effect caused by imbalances in atmospheric and oceanic conditions. If these imbalances are corrected, typhoon turbulence can be weakened or prevented. -/- Applying the Law of Karma to Typhoon Control -/- ✅ Eliminate the root cause: Typhoons are fueled by warm ocean waters. Artificial cooling methods, such as cloud seeding or deep-sea upwelling (bringing cold water to the surface), could reduce the heat energy supply and prevent typhoon formation. -/- ✅ Detect turbulence before it intensifies: AI-driven weather models can predict early-stage typhoon turbulence and allow preemptive interventions. AI can identify defective atmospheric conditions (such as extreme heat buildup in ocean currents) and trigger mitigation efforts. -/- ✅ Disrupt vortex formation: Since typhoons rely on rotational forces, deploying strategically placed atmospheric pressure disturbances (via drones or cloud-seeding techniques) could disrupt the vortex before it gains full strength. -/- By identifying and neutralizing the causes of typhoon turbulence, we ensure that the system remains balanced, preventing large-scale destruction. -/- 2. The Law of Balance in Nature -/- The Law of Balance states that all systems naturally seek equilibrium. When a typhoon forms, it represents an extreme imbalance in the Earth’s energy system—excess heat and moisture create an unstable feedback loop of wind and turbulence. -/- Restoring Balance to Weaken Typhoon Turbulence -/- ✅ Regulating ocean surface temperature: Large-scale ocean-based temperature regulation systems (such as reflective films or artificial cooling platforms) can prevent typhoon formation by reducing the excess heat energy that fuels storms. -/- ✅ Breaking the pressure imbalance: Typhoons depend on a low-pressure core that intensifies wind speeds. By artificially increasing local air pressure using ionization or controlled cloud seeding, the extreme wind turbulence can be diffused before it reaches destructive levels. -/- ✅ Balancing atmospheric moisture: AI-assisted weather control could help regulate humidity levels through strategic rainfall induction in high-risk areas, ensuring that water vapor does not accumulate excessively to fuel a typhoon. -/- Since all systems follow natural equilibrium, strategically rebalancing temperature, pressure, and humidity will neutralize extreme typhoon turbulence. -/- 3. The Law of Feedback Regulation -/- The Law of Feedback Regulation states that all systems operate through feedback loops, where continuous monitoring and adjustment are necessary for stability. Typhoon turbulence follows feedback patterns, which means it can be tracked, analyzed, and counteracted using real-time data. -/- Developing an AI-Driven Typhoon Suppression System -/- ✅ AI-powered real-time monitoring: Advanced satellites, ocean buoys, and drones can provide instant feedback on typhoon development, allowing for proactive interventions rather than reactive disaster response. -/- ✅ Adaptive wind and pressure control: Deploying AI-controlled drones or weather balloons to release cooling agents, modify air pressure, or disperse cloud formations could interrupt the storm's feedback loop, reducing its intensity. -/- ✅ AI-driven weather forecasting for early response: Using deep learning algorithms, AI can accurately predict turbulence patterns weeks in advance, allowing governments to take preventive action instead of just preparing for disaster relief. -/- By implementing real-time monitoring and intervention, we can use feedback regulation to weaken or redirect typhoons before they cause catastrophic damage. -/- The Future of Typhoon Control with the Universal Formula -/- By integrating my universal formula into meteorology and disaster prevention, we can develop a comprehensive AI-driven typhoon suppression system that follows the three fundamental laws of nature: -/- 1. Law of Karma (Causality and Systemic Integrity): Address the root causes of typhoon formation by eliminating atmospheric and oceanic imbalances. -/- 2. Law of Balance in Nature: Restore equilibrium by regulating ocean temperatures, air pressure, and humidity. -/- 3. Law of Feedback Regulation: Use AI-driven real-time monitoring and intervention to weaken or prevent typhoons. -/- Through advanced AI, environmental engineering, and a deep understanding of nature’s laws, we can move beyond simply predicting typhoons and start actively controlling their development. -/- Conclusion -/- Typhoon turbulence, long considered an unpredictable force of nature, is fundamentally a problem of imbalance, energy accumulation, and feedback-driven intensification. By applying my universal formula, we can shift from passive disaster response to active typhoon control, using AI, environmental intervention, and natural equilibrium principles to prevent devastation. -/- This solution is not just theoretical—it aligns with the fundamental laws governing all natural systems. Once implemented, it will mark the beginning of a new era where humanity can harness nature’s own principles to create balance, stability, and protection from extreme weather. -/- . (shrink)

(english) This foundational white paper introduces the concept of Autonomous Spheres, initiated in 2017, as a fundamental conceptual unit designed to move beyond the limitations of centralized systems, extractive platforms, and rigid architectures. An Autonomous Sphere is defined as a coherent entity - human, digital, physical, or hybrid - capable of maintaining its internal rules, flows, integrity, and continuity without reliance on a single critical external point of failure. Autonomy is understood not as isolation, but as a dynamic capacity for (...) existence, adaptation, and cooperation. This document provides a clear conceptual framework that is deliberately non-technical and non-operational. It explicitly aligns with the REED Philosophical Charter, articulating Autonomous Spheres in relation to REED Nodes, the community fabric, community Labels, and coherence frameworks based on Systemic Quantum Spirals (SQS). The white paper establishes a shared theoretical foundation applicable across diverse contexts - human communities, digital environments, education, humanitarian structures, autonomous systems, robotics, and drone swarms - while affirming that Autonomous Spheres are independent of specific technologies but inseparable from the values that govern them. This document is an independent conceptual work. Any implementation, adaptation, or operational use is addressed in separate documents and requires explicit authorization. This document is part of Wave 1 — Foundations within the Continuum Waves conceptual framework. --- Résumé (Français) Ce livre blanc fondateur présente le concept de Sphères autonomes, initié en 2017, comme une unité conceptuelle fondamentale destinée à dépasser les limites des systèmes centralisés, des plateformes extractives et des architectures rigides. Une Sphère autonome est définie comme une entité cohérente - humaine, numérique, physique ou hybride - capable de maintenir ses règles internes, ses flux, son intégrité et sa continuité sans dépendre d’un point externe critique unique. L’autonomie y est conçue non comme un isolement, mais comme une capacité dynamique d’existence, d’adaptation et de coopération. Ce document propose un cadre conceptuel clair, volontairement non technique et non opérationnel. Il s’inscrit explicitement dans l’alignement de la Charte philosophique REED, en articulant les Sphères autonomes avec les notions de NODES, de nappe communautaire, de Labels communautaires et de cadres de cohérence fondés sur les Spirales Quantiques Systémiques (SQS). Le livre blanc établit ainsi une base théorique commune applicable à des contextes variés - communautés humaines, environnements numériques, éducation, humanitaire, systèmes autonomes, robotique et essaims de drones - tout en affirmant que les Sphères autonomes sont indépendantes des technologies, mais indissociables des valeurs qui les gouvernent. Ce document constitue une œuvre conceptuelle indépendante. Toute implémentation, adaptation ou usage opérationnel fait l’objet de documents distincts et requiert une autorisation explicite. Ce document fait partie de la Vague 1 — Fondations du cadre conceptuel Continuum Waves. (shrink)

-/- The Ethics of Overpopulation: A Tool for War or a Path to Imbalance? -/- The idea of intentionally manipulating population growth to create more soldiers for war is a complex and ethically troubling concept. While historical precedents suggest that such strategies have been employed, examining their implications through the lens of natural law and societal balance reveals profound consequences. This discourse explores the historical, ethical, and practical dimensions of this issue and the potential long-term impacts of such actions. -/- (...) Historical Precedents and Motivations -/- Throughout history, population growth has often been tied to militaristic ambitions. Rulers and governments have implemented policies to increase birth rates, particularly during times of conflict or expansion. For instance, Napoleon Bonaparte incentivized larger families in France to expand his army, and Nazi Germany promoted high birth rates under the guise of national strength and racial purity. These examples highlight how pro-natalist policies have historically been used to serve the interests of war and power. -/- The rationale behind these policies is clear: larger populations provide a greater pool of potential soldiers. In societies where military service is mandatory or economically attractive, a higher birth rate ensures a steady supply of recruits. However, this approach raises critical ethical questions about the value placed on human life and the potential exploitation of vulnerable populations. -/- Ethical and Moral Implications -/- Manipulating population growth for the purpose of creating soldiers treats individuals as mere tools for warfare, undermining their inherent dignity and humanity. Such actions prioritize national or military ambitions over the well-being of citizens, leading to generational cycles of poverty, suffering, and inequality. Moreover, intentionally fostering overpopulation disregards the broader societal and environmental consequences, including resource scarcity, overcrowding, and social unrest. -/- From the perspective of natural law, this approach represents a clear violation of balance. The universal law of balance emphasizes harmony between human decisions and the natural world. Any attempt to manipulate population growth for militaristic purposes creates systemic imbalances, not only within society but also in the environment. Overpopulation exacerbates ecological degradation and strains the planet’s finite resources, leading to widespread consequences that far outweigh any temporary military advantage. -/- Modern Warfare and Population Dynamics -/- The evolution of warfare further challenges the rationale for such strategies. Modern conflicts increasingly rely on technological advancements, such as artificial intelligence, drones, and cyberwarfare, which reduce the dependence on large standing armies. This shift diminishes the need for overpopulation as a means of military expansion and highlights the growing importance of education, technological innovation, and strategic planning over sheer numbers. -/- In this context, the intentional manipulation of population growth becomes not only unethical but also impractical. Nations seeking military strength should focus on developing technological capabilities and fostering innovation rather than perpetuating cycles of overpopulation and exploitation. -/- A Balanced Approach to Population and Peace -/- Addressing the root causes of conflict and promoting sustainable growth offer a more balanced and ethical alternative. Education, access to family planning, and the cultivation of critical thinking can empower societies to break free from cycles of overpopulation and war. Furthermore, global cooperation and adherence to principles of natural balance can guide humanity toward peace, ensuring that decisions align with long-term well-being rather than short-term military ambitions. -/- The universal law of balance underscores the interconnectedness of all systems—natural, societal, and individual. Decisions that prioritize harmony and sustainability ultimately lead to a more stable and prosperous world. Conversely, actions driven by exploitation and imbalance, such as manipulating population growth for war, create cascading consequences that undermine both humanity and the planet. -/- Conclusion -/- The intentional manipulation of population growth for the purpose of creating soldiers for war is a practice rooted in historical precedent but fraught with ethical, societal, and environmental consequences. In an era where technological advancements and global challenges demand sustainable solutions, such strategies are not only outdated but also incompatible with the principles of balance and natural law. Humanity must strive for a future where peace and harmony take precedence over exploitation and conflict, guided by a holistic understanding of balance and sustainability. Only then can we ensure a world that values life over war and fosters progress without compromising the dignity and well-being of future generations. -/- . (shrink)

Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems are here. Technological development will see them become widespread in the near future. This is in a matter of years rather than decades. When the UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons meets on 10-14th November 2014, well-considered guidance for a decision on the general policy direction for LAWS is clearly needed. While there is widespread opposition to LAWS—or ‘killer robots’, as they are popularly called—and a growing campaign advocates banning them outright, we argue the opposite. LAWS (...) may very well reduce suffering and death in war. Rather than banning them, they should be regulated, to ensure both compliance with international humanitarian law, and that this positive outcome occurs. This policy memo sets out the basic structure and content of the regulation required. (shrink)

(english) This foundational white paper introduces the concept of Autonomous Spheres, initiated in 2017, as a fundamental conceptual unit designed to move beyond the limitations of centralized systems, extractive platforms, and rigid architectures. An Autonomous Sphere is defined as a coherent entity - human, digital, physical, or hybrid - capable of maintaining its internal rules, flows, integrity, and continuity without reliance on a single critical external point of failure. Autonomy is understood not as isolation, but as a dynamic capacity for (...) existence, adaptation, and cooperation. This document provides a clear conceptual framework that is deliberately non-technical and non-operational. It explicitly aligns with the REED Philosophical Charter, articulating Autonomous Spheres in relation to REED Nodes, the community fabric, community Labels, and coherence frameworks based on Systemic Quantum Spirals (SQS). The white paper establishes a shared theoretical foundation applicable across diverse contexts - human communities, digital environments, education, humanitarian structures, autonomous systems, robotics, and drone swarms - while affirming that Autonomous Spheres are independent of specific technologies but inseparable from the values that govern them. This document is an independent conceptual work. Any implementation, adaptation, or operational use is addressed in separate documents and requires explicit authorization. --- Résumé (Français) Ce livre blanc fondateur présente le concept de Sphères autonomes, initié en 2017, comme une unité conceptuelle fondamentale destinée à dépasser les limites des systèmes centralisés, des plateformes extractives et des architectures rigides. Une Sphère autonome est définie comme une entité cohérente - humaine, numérique, physique ou hybride - capable de maintenir ses règles internes, ses flux, son intégrité et sa continuité sans dépendre d’un point externe critique unique. L’autonomie y est conçue non comme un isolement, mais comme une capacité dynamique d’existence, d’adaptation et de coopération. Ce document propose un cadre conceptuel clair, volontairement non technique et non opérationnel. Il s’inscrit explicitement dans l’alignement de la Charte philosophique REED, en articulant les Sphères autonomes avec les notions de NODES, de nappe communautaire, de Labels communautaires et de cadres de cohérence fondés sur les Spirales Quantiques Systémiques (SQS). Le livre blanc établit ainsi une base théorique commune applicable à des contextes variés - communautés humaines, environnements numériques, éducation, humanitaire, systèmes autonomes, robotique et essaims de drones - tout en affirmant que les Sphères autonomes sont indépendantes des technologies, mais indissociables des valeurs qui les gouvernent. Ce document constitue une œuvre conceptuelle indépendante. Toute implémentation, adaptation ou usage opérationnel fait l’objet de documents distincts et requiert une autorisation explicite. (shrink)