In The Terminator, a computer system called Skynet tries to wipe out humanity in a nuclear holocaust.
So you might think it would be a very bad idea to hand over control of our nuclear weapons to artificial intelligence.
But that’s exactly what two eminent military experts have proposed.
Most of the nuclear weapons held by the US and its allies were designed in the Cold War, when there would have been at least a small amount of warning that Russia had launched its doomsday weapons.
This would allow the President to order retaliation, whereupon both nations would have been destroyed and the rest of the world plunged into a nuclear winter humanity would be unlikely to survive.
Nowadays, the threat has changed. Russia and China both have hypersonic weapons and even nuclear cruise missiles allow them to strike so quickly that the US might not even have time to respond.
In the late 1980s, Russia developed a so-called ‘dead hand’ system which would fire its entire arsenal in case of an attack. Some analysts believe this mechanism is still in place.
Now in an essay for War On The Rocks, Dr Adam Lowther, director of research and education at the Louisiana Tech Research Institute, and Curtis McGiffin, associate dean of the School of Strategic Force Studies at the Air Force Institute of Technology, called on the US to develop a similar system.
The academics raised the slightly alarming prospect of handing control of this system to artificial intelligence.
They wrote: ‘To maintain the deterrent value of America’s strategic forces, the United States may need to develop something that might seem unfathomable — an automated strategic response system based on artificial intelligence.’
‘such a suggestion will generate comparisons to Dr. Strangelove’s doomsday machine, War Games’ War Operation Plan Response, and the Terminator’s Skynet, but the prophetic imagery of these science fiction films is quickly becoming reality,’ the academics added.
However, they also warned of ‘profound concern by well-respected experts in the field that science fiction may become reality, because artificial intelligence designers cannot control their creation’.
Scientists recently calculated what would happen if the US and Russia launched their nuclear arsenals during a war of mutually assured destruction.
This cataclysmic conflict would cause a post-apocalyptic nuclear winter that is almost too grim to imagine.
They confirmed that burning cities and forests would throw so much soot into the air that the whole planet would cloud over and shiver through a chilly period lasting up to 10 years.
This would blot out the sun’s light, stop crops from growing and cause a ‘global famine’ that could kill billions or even kill off our species.
A team from Rutgers University and the University of Colorado carried out sophisticated simulations to reveal the severity of a nuclear winter.
They wrote: ‘Massive forest fires ignited by nuclear weapons would rage for weeks after a war, producing a pall of smoke that would obscure the Sun and reduce sunlight at the surface for the duration of the fires.’
‘A nuclear winter could occur from this smoke,’ they added.
‘In a war where nuclear weapons would be used, military and industrial centers located in urban areas would be targeted, which contain fuel loading much higher than forests, thus creating an enormous amount of smoke when burned.
‘Urban fires injecting smoke into the upper troposphere could produce severe climate changes and that urban firestorms could inject smoke into the stratosphere, leading to rapid interhemispheric transport and a long‐lasting smoke pall.’
The simulation suggests ‘surface light levels remain below 40% of normal for 3 years, returning to normal after about 10 years after the war starts’.
This would mean temperatures barely get above freezing in midsummer in many parts of the world, causing a ‘near 90% reduction in the growing season’ and leaving billions at risk of starvation.
The authors called for immediate nuclear disarmament and added: ‘A full‐scale nuclear attack would be suicidal for the country that decides to carry out such an attack.
‘The use of nuclear weapons in this manner by the United States and Russia would have disastrous consequences globally. To completely remove the possibility of an environmental catastrophe as a result of a full‐scale nuclear war, decision-makers must have a full understanding of the grave climatic consequences of nuclear war and act accordingly.
‘Ultimately, the reduction of nuclear arsenals and the eventual disarmament of all nuclear-capable parties are needed.’