The conflict could be formal military engagements, but also civil uprisings or riots; I'm using a broad definition of "conflict", though there must be a field of engagement. The weapons platform could be a drone, a vehicular weapons targeting and firing system, a missile that chooses targets and launches itself, a self-guided ground assault device, or any number of other things.
Must be:
"Autonomous" - able to act without direct human action, and do so in a combat context. Can have oversight and be interruptible by human operators, but not require it. Must also be physically detached from human soldiers (no infantry firearms or supplemental gear that is unable to act when not attached to infantry helmets, packs, armor, etc.), though can be embedded into vehicles.
"Lethal" - equipped with lethal armaments intended for use on human targets, not simply a support or nonlethal pacification robot.
"Deployed" - present on the field of engagement in a nonreserve capacity.
Static explosive devices like mines and claymores don't count.
Doesn't need to actually fire or use its lethal tools against human targets, though they must be equipped while deployed.
Resolves YES if the criteria are met at any point after question creation and reported via verifiable media. Resolves NO shortly after close otherwise.
Shorter term version:
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ111 | |
| 2 | Ṁ56 | |
| 3 | Ṁ35 | |
| 4 | Ṁ23 | |
| 5 | Ṁ22 |
People are also trading
This would seem to count, then:
Ukrainian developers have confirmed that their drones are now carrying out autonomous strikes on Russian forces without a human operator. This is the first time such drones are known to have been used, as UN allegations about autonomous attacks in Libya in 2020 remain unproven.
The Saker Scout drones can find, identify and attack 64 different types of Russian ‘military objects’ on their own, operating in areas where radio jamming blocks communication and prevents other drones from working.
[…]
The most radical use of the Saker Scout is to carry out attacks without a human in the loop, finding and hitting targets autonomously. A company spokesman confirmed to me that the Saker Scout had already been used in this mode, but only on a small scale. Most likely it is only used autonomously when radio interference or jamming prevents direct operator control.
Ukrainians claim they deployed such system https://twitter.com/PStyle0ne1/status/1750414280350912997, heard (no link now) that Russians also claim this. Will probably take time to clear up the specifics (e.g. does the system require that a human guides the drones to the area of action?)
Would immovable autonomous turrets count? (Like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SGR-A1
)count if deployed in a conflict? Or is mobility important?
@MartinModrak ooo interesting edge case! I'm inclined to agree that they would, though they don't yet hit the "deployed" requirement as there's no active battle. how do traders here feel?
Patriot is advertised as „automated operations - including man-in-the-loop (human) override“. Is that sufficiently „autonomous“?
I assume it does not fulfill the „lethal“ condition because it only targets missiles.
@MaxPayne Can Patriot fire on its own? In any case, you're correct on the second point unless, in this case, we see evidence of it firing itself against manned aircraft