Speaker 1: Now we're joined right now with doctor Noel Sharky. We
Speaker 1: were concerned that we might not be able to get him.
Speaker 1: He is traveling the globe trying to wake people up
Speaker 1: to the dangers and the abuses of robotics technology. He's
Speaker 1: actually a professor of artificial intelligence and robotics, and he
Speaker 1: has now after he had kind of an epiphany.
Speaker 2: We're going to let him tell you about it. I
Speaker 2: won't try to describe it.
Speaker 1: His core research interest is now in the ethical applications
Speaker 1: of robotics and artificial intelligence.
Speaker 2: Doctor Sharky, can you hear me?
Speaker 3: I can hear you? Very cleared you David?
Speaker 2: Great? Great?
Speaker 1: So you found a wi fi in that monastery.
Speaker 2: Yes, that's great, that's great.
Speaker 1: Tell us a little bit about your epiphany when you
Speaker 1: went from you were working in robotics. You are very
Speaker 1: much interested in the technology of it, but like so
Speaker 1: many of us who work in engineering or technology, you
Speaker 1: didn't realize exactly some of the dark ways that was
Speaker 1: being used.
Speaker 4: No, I didn't. I had my head in the bio thing,
Speaker 4: just almost my research. And I was at a press
Speaker 4: conference in London about a government report on talking about robots,
Speaker 4: worrying about housing benefits for robots of the future. It
Speaker 4: was kind of a nutty report and it was the
Speaker 4: first report our government had put out about robotics. And
Speaker 4: at the press conference some journalists said to me, well,
Speaker 4: can you tell.
Speaker 3: Us a little bit about military robots, And.
Speaker 4: Of course I knew nothing about it, apart from a
Speaker 4: little bit about bomb disposal because I'm from Northern Ireland
Speaker 4: and we know.
Speaker 3: About bomb disposal.
Speaker 4: So I thought I'd go off for the evening and
Speaker 4: just have a quick look at the internet, you know,
Speaker 4: an hour or so sort I answer questions. Seven months later,
Speaker 4: I finished that little look at the internet, having read,
Speaker 4: you know, through all the US plans from two thousand
Speaker 4: and one right up to the present at the time,
Speaker 4: which was five years six years of plans for all
Speaker 4: the US forces, the road maps, and they were all
Speaker 4: talking about the application of atonnels robots for killing people.
Speaker 4: And I just thought this is ridiculous. The way they
Speaker 4: were talking about it. It was like science fiction. They
Speaker 4: didn't seem to have an idea about the limitations. And
Speaker 4: so I wrote an article for the Guardian newspaper in
Speaker 4: the UK then two thousand and seven, and it started
Speaker 4: there and it's been a whirlwind since.
Speaker 1: I find it very alarming because I look at every
Speaker 1: week we see some kind of new robotic technology. They're
Speaker 1: spinning it in the media as saying that these are
Speaker 1: the Pentagon's rescue robots. I don't think that darp is
Speaker 1: really funding rescue operations. I don't think the Pentagon's really
Speaker 1: funding that. If anybody thinks that after looking at the
Speaker 1: way they're using drones to assassinate people all over the world,
Speaker 1: they need to have their head examined. That's some of
Speaker 1: the most obvious propaganda I've ever seen. The media should
Speaker 1: be ashamed of itself for putting out these killer robots,
Speaker 1: these potential, these robotic projects that are being put out
Speaker 1: by the Defense Advanced Research Projects DARPA. DARPA has a
Speaker 1: research budget that is higher than they've.
Speaker 2: Got for the entire budget of North Korea.
Speaker 1: We're supposed to be concerned about North Korea, yet North
Speaker 1: Korea's entire economy is about the same size as the
Speaker 1: DARPER research budget, and DARPER is constantly this seems to
Speaker 1: be their primary focus.
Speaker 4: Well, darker aren't accountable, so their thing, and that's a
Speaker 4: good research agenda. Their agenda is you just keep funding
Speaker 4: everything that's.
Speaker 3: Emn slightly crazy.
Speaker 4: And as long as one of them comes up and
Speaker 4: that is, you know, comes up trumps, then you're okay.
Speaker 4: But I was laughing there because one of the reports
Speaker 4: I read from.
Speaker 3: DARPA about these humanoid robots that are going.
Speaker 4: To they're going to carry wrenches, and they talk about
Speaker 4: them going ahead of the forces. Well, why would you
Speaker 4: have a pile of humanoid robots going ahead of the
Speaker 4: forces with wrenches unto people's water pipes?
Speaker 2: Fakes the broken tanks.
Speaker 1: Yeah, here's the headline, but three hundred and thirty pound
Speaker 1: robot may one day save your life. That's talking about
Speaker 1: the Atlas robot. And this troubling thing is is that
Speaker 1: when the Atlas robot came out, I looked at it.
Speaker 1: I thought it was very frightening, the way that this
Speaker 1: thing is able to move around, and the fact that
Speaker 1: it has these two long arms that essentially look like cylinders,
Speaker 1: where I could imagine them being guns of some sort.
Speaker 1: And Ray Kurzweild comes out and says, that's great. Now
Speaker 1: all he needs is a brain so he can act autonomously.
Speaker 4: Oh god, yeah, that's I think you're right that I
Speaker 4: can and see the cylinders are going to become machine guns.
Speaker 4: I would say, you know, it's no doubt about that
Speaker 4: at all. Maybe not for a while, but that's the
Speaker 4: that would be the general plan. I would think, yes,
Speaker 4: would Why would dark would be spending money and rescuing
Speaker 4: people when when the the business rescue?
Speaker 1: Ever? Yeah, and then we have these articles that are
Speaker 1: coming out and this is about a year ago. This
Speaker 1: is from Wired's Dangeroum. It says the Pentagon doesn't trust
Speaker 1: its own robots. They say that there's a cloud of
Speaker 1: distrust and misunderstanding hovering over robot. So the Pengon already
Speaker 1: has so they're looking at this and they're evaluating this,
Speaker 1: and they don't really like it. So we've got to
Speaker 1: conduct a media campaign to change the public's mind, to
Speaker 1: change the military's mind. You're pushing back in the opposite direction.
Speaker 1: And we understand that the military industrial complex wants this
Speaker 1: very badly. They see this as a brand new profit center.
Speaker 1: I'm very, very concerned about the lack of accountability that
Speaker 1: is going to happen with these killer robots.
Speaker 2: Can you address that?
Speaker 4: Yes, I mean you're right about the profit I mean
Speaker 4: just in terms of the drone.
Speaker 3: So what we know about already.
Speaker 4: I mean, Israel mid four point eight billion in the
Speaker 4: last five years profit on those, and this competition is
Speaker 4: so stiff. So the idea is that you've got all
Speaker 4: the drones, how do you compete in that big market.
Speaker 4: And the way you compete is let's add autonomy to it.
Speaker 4: Let's make them work on their own, and then we
Speaker 4: can make a lot more money. And what we're trying
Speaker 4: to do is we're trying to preemptively ban them. That
Speaker 4: means ban them before they get out and before this
Speaker 4: too much investment, because once billions of dollars have been
Speaker 4: spent on it.
Speaker 3: It's going to be very difficult. Yes, we're making very
Speaker 3: good head the un Actually.
Speaker 1: Well that's good. I'm glad that you're going around and
Speaker 1: you're addressing the press, you're dressing government, you're pointing out
Speaker 1: to them where this could head.
Speaker 2: I see this.
Speaker 1: You know, you know, when we're talking about nuclear war,
Speaker 1: if some government presses the button and launches a bunch
Speaker 1: of nuclear weapons on someone, there's going to be literally
Speaker 1: hell to pay for that. There's going to be accountability
Speaker 1: for that. But if they take a bunch of killer robots,
Speaker 1: as we've already seen with drones. We've seen how they
Speaker 1: can go in with drones. They can destroy a village
Speaker 1: and there's no accountability. Nobody is held responsible for that.
Speaker 1: And it'll even be easier for them once these robots
Speaker 1: have self autonomy. They can basically say that they've got
Speaker 1: plausible deniability. They can say, well, the software went wrong
Speaker 1: on it, or it was a hardware bugget. It wasn't me,
Speaker 1: it wasn't the president, it wasn't the general, it wasn't
Speaker 1: the lieutenant. It was just these this crazy technology, So
Speaker 1: we'll fix it. Meanwhile, they've killed a lot of and
Speaker 1: I can see them using this domestically as well as abroad.
Speaker 1: So if you think that this is something historically governments
Speaker 1: have killed more of their own people than they've killed
Speaker 1: in other countries, it's called demicides. So if you think
Speaker 1: this is something that is simply going to be used
Speaker 1: against these people on the other side of the world
Speaker 1: that you don't like, you need to wake up about
Speaker 1: that as well.
Speaker 3: I think to really do.
Speaker 4: And the thing is that what will the United States
Speaker 4: and the high technicians like the UK. They have a
Speaker 4: problem understanding that this stuff will proliferate and everyone will.
Speaker 3: Have it and then what are we doing yes to
Speaker 3: be And that's my.
Speaker 4: Biggest worry is this idea that we'll keep ahead of
Speaker 4: the technology will be the ones who'll use it without
Speaker 4: thinking at all that everybody else is going to have it,
Speaker 4: and they will all interact together, and then it's going
Speaker 4: to be a real mess.
Speaker 1: We've already seen countries like Iran setting up their own drones.
Speaker 1: They're not that technologically advanced. It didn't take them that
Speaker 1: long to get drones. It's not going to take them
Speaker 1: long to get robots. This is something and what we're
Speaker 1: concerned about here. I have to say, doctor Sharky, we
Speaker 1: have a little bit different. Situation in the US is
Speaker 1: unique in the sense that now we have this massive
Speaker 1: program of bringing home weapons that have been used in
Speaker 1: Iraq and putting them in police departments here in America.
Speaker 1: And we're already concerned about the fact that humans themselves
Speaker 1: are not being held accountable for their actions when they
Speaker 1: fire on a child with a toy gun. What's going
Speaker 1: to happen when a robot does that? Do you think
Speaker 1: there's going to be the accountability for that?
Speaker 4: Do you really think the United States police will start
Speaker 4: I mean, they certainly talk about arming robots with tasers.
Speaker 3: Mm hmmm, that would start for it. But tasers are
Speaker 3: kind of deadly.
Speaker 4: I mean, one hundred and fifty people died in the
Speaker 4: US within a period of two years taser. So if
Speaker 4: you start arming robots with tasers, then I think it's
Speaker 4: only a short step.
Speaker 3: To arming them with weapons really.
Speaker 1: Yes lethal, and they're very horrible non quote unquote non
Speaker 1: lethal weapons, very horrible ones.
Speaker 2: It's not just tasers.
Speaker 1: They have all kinds of things that they can beam
Speaker 1: at you to make you sake, to blind you, that
Speaker 1: sort of thing we just had you talked about how
Speaker 1: they kill people. We've got a teenager right here just
Speaker 1: south of Austin that was tasered by a cop and
Speaker 1: a school who was standing there standing around a fight
Speaker 1: and didn't get out of the way in time. The
Speaker 1: cop tasered him, fell down and cracked his head. He's
Speaker 1: now in a coma. They believe he may die. That
Speaker 1: happens all the time with tasers. So when you talk
Speaker 1: about non lethal force, you talk about shooting people with
Speaker 1: rubber bullets, you talk about using these gases on people.
Speaker 1: That's not something that we're looking forward to seeing happen
Speaker 1: in terms of crowd control.
Speaker 2: That can be very very oppressive.
Speaker 3: Yes, but you don't have to worry too much because
Speaker 3: it went to stop it.
Speaker 2: Good. Good. So tell us about your campaign.
Speaker 1: Tell us you're going around and you're talking to different governments.
Speaker 1: I guess you're having public speeches where you're trying to
Speaker 1: inform the public.
Speaker 2: How is your press coverage.
Speaker 3: Well, press coverage has been very good.
Speaker 4: But we had a breakthrough recently at the United Nations.
Speaker 3: There's a committee of.
Speaker 4: The United Nations called the CCW, and that's the place
Speaker 4: where poisonous gas has got banned, biological weapons, it's got
Speaker 4: banned chemical weapons, so that's the place for prohibiting new weapons.
Speaker 3: And we spoke.
Speaker 4: To the French have just taken up the presidency, and
Speaker 4: we spoke to the French ambassador. Then we spoke to
Speaker 4: the US delegation and they've agreed with this that they
Speaker 4: would put this forward as a mandate for discussion in
Speaker 4: the UN. And last Friday, Friday, two weeks ago, they
Speaker 4: had a one hundred and seventeen nations from the CCW
Speaker 4: met and one of those nations could be to it.
Speaker 3: Russia over there, China were there.
Speaker 4: There was a massive, massive, discussion and they accepted the mandate.
Speaker 4: So next year the CCW committee are setting up an
Speaker 4: expert workshop to take this on board and discuss it.
Speaker 2: Well, that's that's great.
Speaker 1: And your campaign is stop Killer Robots dot org. They
Speaker 1: can learn about that on the internet wwws Stop Killer
Speaker 1: Robots do. It's a campaign to stop killer robots. Now
Speaker 1: you've taken this to the UN, You've taken it to
Speaker 1: other countries. I'm a little bit more skeptical of the
Speaker 1: UN and these other countries. Hopefully they will ban this,
Speaker 1: and hopefully these other countries won't secretly develop this on
Speaker 1: their own worry that they're going to have some kind
Speaker 1: of a robot gap or something like that, like they've
Speaker 1: had weapons defensively do it because the're afraid the other
Speaker 1: guy might do it. My big concern and I think
Speaker 1: your campaign will be very effective at this as well,
Speaker 1: and that is to address the engineers and the scientists,
Speaker 1: to try to get them to understand because that, I
Speaker 1: believe is.
Speaker 2: Where we really need to go.
Speaker 1: As long as there's an engineer or a scientist who
Speaker 1: will develop this kind of stuff for pay, who doesn't
Speaker 1: look at the ethics of their work, you're going to
Speaker 1: find some kind of a politician or a dictator somewhere
Speaker 1: who will do it, who will use those people, who
Speaker 1: will pay them large amounts of money, and who will
Speaker 1: break any treaty that comes up, won't you.
Speaker 4: Well, the problem is it's mainly the US because they're
Speaker 4: more cautious in Europe. In the US, it's very difficult
Speaker 4: to not get funded by the military. Yes, most of
Speaker 4: the robotic slabs are run by the military or funded
Speaker 4: by the military, and the people aren't necessarily making weapons
Speaker 4: and things. But when you're funded by the military, it
Speaker 4: stops you speaking up.
Speaker 2: Yes, yes, it stops you sitting.
Speaker 3: Up against it. I mean we had there was a
Speaker 3: there's hope, I mean there was there was.
Speaker 4: There's a professional magazine in the US called The Engineer,
Speaker 4: and they ran a poll of the readers asking how
Speaker 4: many people would go for a complete ban or how
Speaker 4: many people would just go for trying to make the
Speaker 4: weapons more perfect over time. Only three percent of the
Speaker 4: readership said they would make the weapons go more perfect
Speaker 4: over time, and sixty seventy three percent said there should
Speaker 4: be a total ban.
Speaker 3: So we're consciousness of it.
Speaker 1: That's very hopeful because so many times we'll talk to directly, Alex,
Speaker 1: We'll talk to soldiers and policemen over the radio and say,
Speaker 1: understand that the kind of society that you allowed happen.
Speaker 1: If you allow and are part of this kind of
Speaker 1: abuse that we see happening in the streets, that's going
Speaker 1: to be the society that you live. That could be
Speaker 1: your family that is brought under that. And historically we've
Speaker 1: seen that always does happen.
Speaker 2: It doesn't.
Speaker 1: It can't be contained and only limited to people who
Speaker 1: don't work for the government. But we need to have
Speaker 1: that kind of awareness with engineers. And as you pointed out,
Speaker 1: it's very difficult in America to get a job if
Speaker 1: you're an engineer that doesn't involve the military industrial complex.
Speaker 1: I know when I got out it took me a
Speaker 1: while to find a job where I wasn't working for
Speaker 1: the military.
Speaker 2: That was my degree initially.
Speaker 1: So I understand that, and it's good that people will
Speaker 1: privately say that, And I think I really applaud you
Speaker 1: for what you're doing because getting the information out there.
Speaker 1: People don't even believe that this could happen. In so
Speaker 1: many cases, they don't believe that the technology is there.
Speaker 1: They think it's just the science fiction fantasy of the terminator,
Speaker 1: and we've been criticized for that here that we're talking
Speaker 1: about some wild thing, talk about the absolute talk about
Speaker 1: how the technology is approaching rapidly.
Speaker 4: Well, we've had forty four nations at the UN and
Speaker 4: I speak.
Speaker 3: Up with concern.
Speaker 4: So people better believe in now it's not science fiction
Speaker 4: anymore when you have major countries that the US, Germany,
Speaker 4: Pakistan even you know, all speaking up against killer robots
Speaker 4: or about them. So it's definitely on course to happen.
Speaker 4: There's no question of that unless we stop it. But
Speaker 4: you have to be very worried in the US as
Speaker 4: well about your privacy. I mean, you've got the NSA.
Speaker 4: They're really doing a lot of nasty things surveying people.
Speaker 4: But you're starting to get a lot of drones, and
Speaker 4: once the drone has become autonomous, not even arms, they
Speaker 4: can be everywhere. They're getting very small. And what worries
Speaker 4: me is is not the current government you have, but
Speaker 4: these are legacy systems. So what does the next government
Speaker 4: do with them? What does the next government do with them?
Speaker 4: Because they just inherit them direct and if you ever
Speaker 4: want to create an authoritarian regime, you're going to have
Speaker 4: the right tools to do it, and that is a
Speaker 4: great concern to me as well.
Speaker 3: Military stuff.
Speaker 2: You hit the nail on the head.
Speaker 1: What we're building in the United States right now is
Speaker 1: a perfect infrastructure for tyranny. And whether our current leadership
Speaker 1: uses it or it's the next door second administration down,
Speaker 1: that's what we're concerned.
Speaker 2: About, Doctor Sharky.
Speaker 1: What I would like for you to talk about in
Speaker 1: this segment is the state of the art in robotics.
Speaker 1: People don't understand how imminent this problem is, how rapidly
Speaker 1: it's coming upon us.
Speaker 2: Could you address that.
Speaker 3: Yes, certainly.
Speaker 4: Well, we've got lots of armed robots the on the
Speaker 4: grind and in the air as you know, that are
Speaker 4: remote controlled. But what's happening now is a very rapid
Speaker 4: development of platforms that will.
Speaker 3: Carry the weapons.
Speaker 4: The more we talk in the campaign about banning these
Speaker 4: weapons systems, the more we're driving them underground.
Speaker 3: It seems there's less talk about it now.
Speaker 4: But for instance, in the United States, you've got three
Speaker 4: device as I'd like.
Speaker 3: To mention to you.
Speaker 4: One is called the X forty seven B and that
Speaker 4: can land on there. It's a fighter jet, a combat
Speaker 4: unmanned combat aircraft fast subsominic just beneath the speed of sound.
Speaker 3: It can land on an.
Speaker 4: Aircraft carrier, it can take off from an air car carrier,
Speaker 4: and it's going to be used in the Pacific. It's
Speaker 4: got ten times the range of one of your F
Speaker 4: thirty five fighter jets, so that's really productive for them.
Speaker 4: And it's just been tested two weeks ago in very
Speaker 4: windy conditions and that's working very well. That will be
Speaker 4: weaponized and used, so it's like a super drone, but
Speaker 4: you don't need people involved at all and controlling it.
Speaker 4: You've also got a prototype system called the Crusher and
Speaker 4: that's developed by Carnegie Mellon and DARPA.
Speaker 3: Again.
Speaker 4: Of course, the Crush there's a seven and a half
Speaker 4: ton truck and you can see it. If anybody wants
Speaker 4: to go on YouTube and just to crusher CMU, they
Speaker 4: will find it and they'll see it crushing cadillacs and
Speaker 4: it's got a big gun up there top of it. Now,
Speaker 4: the other device that you're making in the United States
Speaker 4: is on the HTV two program again DARPA, and they've
Speaker 4: got an aircraft called a Fault and the idea is
Speaker 4: to be able to get an unmanned combat aircraft anywhere
Speaker 4: on the planet within that one hour window. So this
Speaker 4: thing has been tested at thirteen thousand miles an hour,
Speaker 4: so that's just the United States.
Speaker 3: In the UK we have.
Speaker 4: The Tyrannus, which is actually supersonic, so that's even faster.
Speaker 4: That's an intracontinental unmanned combat aircraft. Fully autonomous means that
Speaker 4: there's no human controlling it, and that's been tested in
Speaker 4: Australia just in the last couple of months, so these
Speaker 4: are progressing very quickly.
Speaker 3: The Chinese have the Invisible Swords as the.
Speaker 4: Engine, and that's being designed and built for air to
Speaker 4: air combat, again no human controlling it.
Speaker 3: The Russians have the SCAT. The Israelis are using.
Speaker 4: One called the Guardian, and at the beginning when they've
Speaker 4: built developed at the top talk a lot about it
Speaker 4: being fully autonomous to do roots and to fire on
Speaker 4: people at the borders between Palestine and Israel.
Speaker 3: But now I spoke to it and it was really.
Speaker 4: Colleague the other day who was very excited because I
Speaker 4: have had an early picture off it with guns on it,
Speaker 4: and now that they can't find any pictures off them
Speaker 4: with guns, so I'm afraid we're driving these people underground
Speaker 4: a bit, but they're still doing it well.
Speaker 1: You know, we can understand very quickly the implications of
Speaker 1: something like the Crusher that's going to crush vehicles domestically,
Speaker 1: but even when it comes to these supersonic jet transports
Speaker 1: that are taking off from aircraft carriers, that are unmanned
Speaker 1: aerial vehicles that are remotely controlled, that has a lot
Speaker 1: of danger in the sense that that's going to make
Speaker 1: our already aggressive government starting wars everywhere for very little
Speaker 1: justification and without congressional authorization. That's going to make them
Speaker 1: even more likely to get involved in these wars. And
Speaker 1: there's this thing called blowback. You know, once you start
Speaker 1: a war somewhere else, it will come home to you
Speaker 1: one way or the other. Eventually it may be a
Speaker 1: semester warfare, it may be terrorism with people coming to
Speaker 1: your country and blowing people up in shopping malls, which
Speaker 1: will then be used to send out the crusher robots.
Speaker 1: But thank you so much, Professor Sharky for joining us.
Speaker 1: We're out of time. Good luck on your campaign. Keep
Speaker 1: trying to educate people about these dangers. It's a very
Speaker 1: important thing you're doing.
Speaker 3: Thank you for having me on spreading the world for us.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much, Thank you very much.
Speaker 2: That's stop Killer Robots dot org.
Speaker 1: The common man. They created common Core. They've dumbed down
Speaker 1: our children. They created common past, track and control us.
Speaker 1: They're Commons project to make sure the commoners own nothing
Speaker 1: and the communist future. They see the common man as simple,
Speaker 1: not sophisticated ordinary. But each of us has worth and
Speaker 1: dignity created in the image of God. That is what
Speaker 1: we have in common. That is what they want to
Speaker 1: take away. Their most powerful weapons are isolation, deception, intimidation.
Speaker 1: They desire to know everything about us, while they hide
Speaker 1: everything from us. It's time to turn that around and
Speaker 1: expose what they want to hide. Please share the information
Speaker 1: and links you'll find at Thedavidnightshow dot com. Thank you
Speaker 1: for listening, Thank you for sharing. If you can't support
Speaker 1: us financially, please keep us in your prayers. Ddavidnightshow dot
Speaker 1: com