Could a Robot Apocalypse Really Happen? We Ask an Expert

Robot uprisings have been a popular science fiction trope from the earliest days of the genre. Tellingly, Czech playwright Karel Čapek’s 1921 production R.U.R. both introduced the word “robot” and depicted their rebellion against humanity. It’s been almost one hundred years since the premiere of R.U.R., but if groups like this one on Facebook (see an accompanying training manual on robot warfare here) are any indication, we’ve hardly managed to put this fear behind us. Every year brings more tales of robot mayhem, like Daniel H. Wilson’s soon to be released novel, Robopocalypse. Depicting an outright war of man versus machine, Robopocalypse’s hunter-killer drones and limb-shredding sentient mines make Čapek’s R.U.R. look quaint in comparison. Meanwhile, with our own armed forces waging war by Predator drone and bomb-sniffing bots, one must wonder if a real robot apocalypse could really happen. For an answer to that, I turned to P.W. Singer, a Senior Fellow and Director of the 21st Century Defense Initiative and the author of several books, including Wired for War: The Robotics Revolution and Conflict in the 21st Century.

How did you get interested in robots and warfare?

The short answer is the opening line to my Wired for War book, “Because robots are frakin cool”

The longer answer is that war is a force that has shaped our world in immeasurable ways, from the governments we vote for to the technology we use daily. In turn, robotics is a technology that will be a game-changer for both war and ultimately human history. So it was just a fascinating topic that drew me in, all the more so because people weren’t taking it seriously because it sounded too sci-fi. But remember, they thought the same thing once about flying machines, computers and what HG Wells first called the “atomic bomb.”

Did you learn anything that really surprised you when you were writing your book?

Wow, what didn’t I learn that was stunning. The extent of the use and the fast pace of advancement in this field, compared to how little it is understood, continually shocked me. That is, just when some senior person at the Pentagon would tell me about how far off this technology is, I would next visit a Air Force research lab and see a tiny engine that could fit on the tip of your pencil.

Another thing that shocked me was how influential science fiction was, and how open people in the military were to talking about it. I thought it would be something in the background, but rather I would have Marine officers tell about getting an idea from when they were watching The Empire Strikes Back with their kids. This led me down a fun research pathway which culminated in the section of the book, where I explore the how and why of science fiction’s impact on the real world, covering everything from its direct influences to something that had always fascinated me: why are science fiction writers often a better predictor than government and corporate analysts and second, why is so much of sci fi set in the realm of war, compared to other forms of fiction. Just as I went around interviewing soldiers and insurgents and scientists for other parts of the book, for this one I interviewed some of the greats in the field like Greg Bear and Orson Scot Card. Funnily enough it was actually easier to track down an interview with an Iraqi insurgent than it was to finally arrange the interview with Card. But, it ultimately happened and he gave some amazingly informative responses.

A lot of people are confused about the level of autonomy that combat robots have. What can they do and what can’t they do at this point?

Most systems right now are a mix between remote operation and some limited autonomy. The Terminators are not yet among us. A good example of the evolution is the MQ-1 Predator, which required a human pilot on the ground to do most everything to its replacement, the current MQ-9 Reaper, which can take off and land on its own, and has “smart” sensors that help make sense of data (such as some target recognition), but still require human control for all sorts of tasks including weapons use, to the system currently under design, which will have almost full autonomy.

I get the sense that using robots in warfare is a bit of a double edged sword. Could you tell us about some of the potential benefits and possible drawbacks of putting more robots on the front line?

I think the biggest is the effect on saving lives. One of the true stories in my book is about a robot that is “killed” in action in Iraq, and the commander of the unit writes a condolence letter back to the factory, apologizing for not bringing the soldier home, but also saying he is so glad he didn’t have to write such a letter to a grieving mother. But the flip side of this is that politicians start to look at war differently, without perhaps some of the same due reflection. For example, we’ve carried out more than 200 air strikes into Pakistan using unmanned systems. It’s a major operation, 7 times the size of the Kosovo war in terms of targets hit. But its not gotten any sort of public or congressional debate either to support or oppose it. Even more, it’s the only true air war we are fighting, but because of the technology, its not being run by the US Air Force, but instead by a civilian intelligence agency.

How do you see the nature of combat evolving in the next five years? Decade? Century?

More and more reliance on more and more intelligent machines, but man still at the center of it. That is, war has been and remains to be a force driven by our human failings.

What are your favorite fictional robots?

R2D2 of course has a special place in my heart because it was one of my first action figures and was on my bedsheets at age 6, but I am partial to the special Gold Cylons in the original Battlestar Galactica.

Could we ever possibly see a “terminator” type scenario with robots turning on their human creators?

You cant write a book about robots and war, including even one that is actually a serious non-fiction book that is now on the recommended reading list for the US Navy and US Air Force, without wrestling with that question. The second to last chapter actually explores whether this is something to take seriously or not and what would be the actual preconditions for it to happen. Not to give it away, but the Terminator is less a risk than the Matrix. That is, not so much a worry of Keanu Reeves in leather pants, but us waking up to find ourselves in a world run by machines that we barely understand. Indeed, given everything from the use of over 7,000 drones in our military to the “flash crash” that hit the stock market last year (caused by AI malfunctions) to my reliance on an iPhone that I couldn’t even begin to tell you how it works, we may already be enmeshed in a matrix of technology of our own making.