downer83

Because the motive and the modus operandi make a good fit for the scenario.

The family is not interested in the emotional baggage of foul play, or the hassle of an arduous investigation, which would, hypothetically, probably be fruitless, even if suspicions were accurate. It's much, much easier for loved ones to swallow an official story of a tragic accident.

For total strangers, not burdened by emotions, the scenario is objectively disturbing.

ANCIENT NANOTECHNOLOGY!

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/this-1600-year-old-gob...

Which is worse?

A robotic crime wave, or a human crime wave?

A robotic miscarriage of justice, or a human miscarriage of justice?

I think, in both situations, the two are not equivalent, and the robotic version is not only worse, but carries the potential of total devastation. But maybe I'm chicken little.

When your accusers are provided the luxury of never having to face you, how confident are you that "the law" will be carried out fairly, and that the "laws" themselves will not be arbitrary? Just as confident as you are now of the law?

This is about power differential. Imbalances of power contribute to instability. The kinds of power discussed in this equation are vast, and not to be trifled with. Errors made with the toys of modern warfare can be unforgiving to the point that submarine personnel might be the only survivors.

When you scale up conflict beyond the individual concept of arrest and imprisonment, there is a volatility to open warfare that is whithering, when compared to civil society. If you're that eager to thwart some cops in their activities, then vote a draft into law, advocate mandatory military service and then go rob a bank and shoot some tellers while you're at it. I dare you.

The funny thing about policy wonks is that they believe policy, diplomacy and international law are the only way things get resolved, even amidst the state of nature that persists between international actors.

The reason stock markets have black swans is because legal transactions can never account for illegal activity. Sure, you can buy replacement insurance against theft, but you cannot actually build theft into an accounting model. Stock markets, as social laboratories of economic exchange, will always have crashes because there are black markets that operate behind them in secrecy. Certain companies might befall "unfortunate accidents" and whoopsie daisy! How did that happen?

Consider the question: How interested are you in being arrested and imprisoned by a robotic civilian police officer?

Yeah, but this puts us closer than ever to the brink of a nuclear exchange.

For the purposes of a thought experiment, consider the false dichotomy of "America" and "NotAmerica" as two hypothetical opposing forces, where America has nukes and killer robots and NotAmerica has only nukes.

If you find yourself living in NotAmerica, your motivation to pre-emptively nuke America, simply to avoid the threat of a horrific death dispensed by killer robots, presents itself as an absurdly simple choice. Even if it means suicide.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_matter_of_programming

http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/S/SMOP.html

http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?SimpleMatterOfProgramming

http://everything2.com/title/Smop