The Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) is dedicated to Advancing Computing as a Science & Profession.  "We see a world where computing helps solve tomorrow’s problems – where we use our knowledge and skills to advance the profession and make a positive impact."

The ACM Committee on Professional Ethics (COPE) is responsible for promoting ethical conduct among computing professionals, and the ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct is undergoing a comprehensive review. We have offered the the following recommendation.

We have reviewed "ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct" (Draft 3) and applaud this important guidance for computing professionals [1].

A significant area of ongoing activity is not yet addressed: remote and autonomous systems.  While several aspects of the draft Code pertain, the design and deployment of such systems pose special challenges that computing professionals must specifically consider.  As noted in the Turing Award Lecture of fifty years ago: ethics, professional behavior, and social responsibility cannot be separated from the diverse fields in which computer science is applied [2].

Many robotic systems are being deployed with high degrees of autonomy, long operational endurance, and independence from direct human supervision.  Examples include self-driving cars, unmanned air vehicles (drones), military sentry vehicles, and many others.  Whether manned, unmanned, civil or military, such systems have significant potential for applying indiscriminate lethal force at a distance.  Complex situations, unforeseen interactions, and emergent behaviors often occur that are beyond the original scope or intent of designers and engineers.

Special considerations are necessary for such machines, since preprogrammed machine responses remain inadequate in isolation.  Protections for human life must be considered and engineered into systems capable of prolonged operations beyond the range of direct remote control.  A critical enabler is available to help: the combination of human judgement and artificial intelligence can yield more effective systems than is possible by either alone [3].  Thus sufficient human supervisory guidance, and permission checks for recognizably dangerous situations, must be available for systems that are allowed to operate autonomously. Simply put: if a human is not in charge, then no one is in charge.

Constraints on action (such as limits of authority, and conditions requiring explicit human approval) can be achieved for remote systems presenting potential hazard to life. For example, recent work has shown that human ethical considerations can be expressed using validatable syntax and logical semantics when defining executable robot missions [4].  Indeed, if ethical approaches combining machine and human capabilities can better ensure human safety, it is unethical to not consider them.  Understanding such issues when engineering systems with autonomy requires the technical expertise and moral judgement of computer-science professionals.

We recommend adding a section to the ACM Code that articulates these vital concerns.  Suggested draft Professional Responsibilities paragraph 2.10 follow.