Is staying out of bomb-shelters a human-automation interaction issue?

Cohen-Lazry, Guy; Oron-Gilad, Tal

doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2016.08.002

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other, short-range ADS, such as the Israeli-manufactured Iron Dome, are also capable of ‘identifying, tracking, and engaging targets without human intervention’ (Richemond-Barak and Feinberg, 2016: 494). The Iron Dome makes these engagement ‘decisions’ ‘according to undisclosed algorithms’ that calculate whether an incoming projectile is expected to land in a populated area (Cohen-Lazry, Oron-Gilad, 2016: 26).…”

Section: How Normativity/normality Emerges In Practices: Ads and Huma...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Practice-based and public-deliberative normativity: retaining human control over the use of force

Bode

2023

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The debate about lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS) characterises them as future problems in need of pre-emptive regulation, for example, through codifying meaningful human control. But autonomous technologies are already part of weapons and have shaped how states think about human control. To understand this normative space, I proceed in two steps: first, I theorise how practices of designing, of training personnel for, and of operating weapon systems integrating autonomous technologies have shaped normativity/normality on human control at sites unseen. Second, I trace how this normativity/normality interacts with public deliberations at the Group of Governmental Experts (GGE) on LAWS by theorising potential dynamics of interaction. I find that the normativity/normality emerging from practices performed in relation to weapon systems integrating autonomous technologies assigns humans a reduced role in specific use of force decisions and understands this diminished decision-making capacity as ‘appropriate’ and ‘normal’. In the public-deliberative process, stakeholders have interacted with this normativity by ignoring it, engaging in distancing or positively acknowledging it – rather than scrutinising it. These arguments move beyond prioritising public deliberation in norm research towards exploring practices performed at sites outside of the public eye as productive of normativity. I theorise this process via international practice theories, critical security studies and Science and Technology scholarship to draw out how practices shape normativity, presenting ideas of oughtness and justice, and normality, making something appear normal via collective, repeated performances.

show abstract

Section: How Normativity/normality Emerges In Practices: Ads and Huma...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Practice-based and public-deliberative normativity: retaining human control over the use of force

Bode

2023

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Is staying out of bomb-shelters a human-automation interaction issue?

Cited by 1 publication

References 12 publications

Practice-based and public-deliberative normativity: retaining human control over the use of force

Practice-based and public-deliberative normativity: retaining human control over the use of force

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About