|
|
- Correction: Unfuturing peace: augmented reality image design for Guerrilla
peacebuilding-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
PubDate: 2024-05-31
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-024-00095-y
- Putting algorithmic bias on top of the agenda in the discussions on
autonomous weapons systems-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Biases in artificial intelligence have been flagged in academic and policy literature for years. Autonomous weapons systems—defined as weapons that use sensors and algorithms to select, track, target, and engage targets without human intervention—have the potential to mirror systems of societal inequality which reproduce algorithmic bias. This article argues that the problem of engrained algorithmic bias poses a greater challenge to autonomous weapons systems developers than most other risks discussed in the Group of Governmental Experts on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (GGE on LAWS), which should be reflected in the outcome documents of these discussions. This is mainly because it takes longer to rectify a discriminatory algorithm than it does to issue an apology for a mistake that occurs occasionally. Highly militarised states have controlled both the discussions and their outcomes, which have focused on issues that are pertinent to them while ignoring what is existential for the rest of the world. Various calls from civil society, researchers, and smaller states for a legally binding instrument to regulate the development and use of autonomous weapons systems have always included the call for recognising algorithmic bias in autonomous weapons, which has not been reflected in discussion outcomes. This paper argues that any ethical framework developed for the regulation of autonomous weapons systems should, in detail, ensure that the development and use of autonomous weapons systems do not prejudice against vulnerable sections of (global) society.
PubDate: 2024-05-31
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-024-00094-z
- Analyzing influence operations on Facebook: an exploratory study
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Recently, there have been groundbreaking studies that seek to create unique cybersecurity datasets used to empirically test theories related to strategic cybersecurity. To date, however, this research has neglected cyber-enabled information operations (CEIO). With the remarkable amount of information operations being reported on social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, there is a substantial gap in the literature regarding empirical studies on CEIO using cross-national datasets. This exploratory, descriptive study seeks to remedy this dilemma. To do so, this paper investigates the question, “What are the political and economic characteristics of states that are most likely to be targeted by CEIO over social media on Facebook'” To investigate, this exploratory, descriptive study utilizes a unique Information Operations Threat Report Dataset (2020) based on Facebook’s release of 2020 influence operations information that captures CEIO on its platform from 2017 to 2020. A descriptive data analysis reveals that mixed regimes (i.e., states that are partially authoritarian and democratic) and slightly wealthier states are more likely to be targeted in CEIO on Facebook. These exploratory findings provide useful insights into what types of states may be more susceptible to CEIO attacks on Facebook.
PubDate: 2024-05-29
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-024-00093-0
- Light-speed, contemporary war, and Australia’s national defence
strategic review-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract In our hyperconnected contemporary world, military and civilian digital and cyber technologies rely upon uncontested and uncongested access to frequencies in the electromagnetic spectrum (EMS). This reliance enables light-speed signalic connectivity, interconnectivity, operability, and interoperability of the systems and devices that perpetuate twenty-first century modes of information, remote, hybrid, and digital warfare. Informed by cultural theorist Paul Virilio’s commentaries on speed, light-speed, and war, this article examines speed as an inflection that insidiously underpins the Australian Government’s 2023 National Defence: Defence Strategy Review (DSR) (public version). This is not an exhaustive study of light-speed or the DSR. Rather, this article aims to show how speed and light-speed, used as investigatory lenses, can provide critical insights into relationships between contemporary technology, and war. To this end, the article refers to US and UK defence and government electromagnetic spectrum policy statements, interpolating them into motivations for AUKUS, and the DSR’s positioning.
PubDate: 2024-05-02
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-024-00091-2
- Unfuturing peace: augmented reality image design for Guerilla
peacebuilding-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract This project explores the potential of image-making in augmented reality (AR) technologies as means of designing sustaining quality peace futures—unfuturing peace, focusing on Ukraine’s heroic defense against Russia’s 2022–2024 full-scale war of aggression as a case study. Employing the methodology of compositional interpretation and the conceptual tool “futures images,” the project theoretically and practically differentiates between defuturing and unfuturing as peace design processes in developing an essay of originally designed marker-based Augmented Reality Posters in Support of Ukraine as demos of sustaining quality peace arrangements. The posters reference the topics of (physical) integrity of Ukrainian symbols, global food security and the security of the LGBTQI+ community in Ukraine. The technological artistic process/outcomes of this AR image-making experiment and their relation to power layouts in peacebuilding form the bases for theorizing how AR-supported futures design in war-affected communities—unfuturing peace—could facilitate “guerrilla peacebuilding.” In outlining theoretical and practical premises of guerilla peacebuilding, the project intersects Augmented Reality Posters in Support of Ukraine with explorations of guerilla warfare and counterinsurgency efforts leading to the 2016 Havana Peace Agreements in Colombia as well as mobile technologies/power in guerrilla approaches to democratic development.
PubDate: 2024-03-14
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-024-00090-3
- Adel Al Manthari and Baraa Shiban: Drone Strikes and the Lack of
Accountability-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
PubDate: 2024-02-19
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00084-7
- Air, breath and life
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The enmeshment of compounding elements of airspace insecurity including aerial warfare, climate change, nuclearism, environmental toxicity and state violence urgently requires airspace security as a new human right. Since today’s digital media are central in shaping the psychic impact of airspace insecurity, I argue that we also need a new digital media ecology that includes the analysis of and response to the wide range of traumatic effects, individual and collective, physical and psychological of airspace insecurity. I consider how the proposed new human right to live without physical or psychological threat (Grief, 2022) from above is a crucial step in developing a larger ecology of resistance that must be transnational, transspecies and transgenerational.
PubDate: 2024-01-29
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00082-9
- Short, nasty and brutish: aspects of the Illegalities of militarisation
and weaponisation of outer space and the global threat of deadly kinetic
strikes from above-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
PubDate: 2024-01-08
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00087-4
- The airspace tribunal and the proposed new human right to live without
physical or psychological threat from above-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
PubDate: 2024-01-08
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00078-5
- Strengthening protection against dangers coming from the sky
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The use of new methods and techniques of warfare in Colombia, such as bombing, especially of FARC dissident camps, has caused indiscriminate damage to the non-combatant civilian population, which is confronted with the protection given by International Humanitarian Law and its general principles that the armed forces must respect. However, in Colombia, “operational law” has attempted to justify these indiscriminate attacks, leaving the human rights protection in a secondary position. The creation of a Human Right to Protect the Freedom to Live Without Physical or Psychological Threat from Above may serve as a rule that prevents the use of air strikes and pursues their punishment if they do occur, rather than a criterion for determining when and when they are permissible.
PubDate: 2024-01-01
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00074-9
- The Airspace Tribunal special issue: editors’ introduction
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
PubDate: 2024-01-01
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00089-2
- Ruthlessly exposed: how the law protects the war efforts of powerful
states instead of vulnerable individuals-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Air warfare has long-lasting consequences for civilians. Insufficiently protected by existing law, left vulnerable by the legal prioritization of military tactics, and hardly compensated for their sacrifices, civilians suffer the most. Many recent examples of air warfare show the deadly consequences caused by powerful states. The asymmetry between those using air warfare and those exposed to it calls for a reorientation of the law as we know it.
PubDate: 2024-01-01
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00072-x
- Topologies of air: Shona Illingworth’s art practice and the ethics
of air-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract In her video and sound art practice, artist Shona Illingworth has extensively engaged with atmospheric environments as they are experienced physically and affectively. In the multi-screen and sound installation, Topologies of Air (2021), Illingworth addresses the conditions and discourses that define today’s perception and understandings of airspaces. This article closely examines Topologies of Air and further relates it to Illingworth’s art research practice, outlining key features and methodologies to argue that Illingworth’s decentralized approach to airspaces is rooted in an ethics of air that fosters empathic understanding. This is congruent with the aim of proposing a new human right on the freedom to live without threats from above put forward through the Airspace Tribunal, an integral component of Illingworth’s project that she has developed in collaboration with human right expert, Nick Grief.
PubDate: 2024-01-01
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-022-00053-6
- Algorithmic predictions and pre-emptive violence: artificial intelligence
and the future of unmanned aerial systems-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The military rationale of a pre-emptive strike is predicated upon the calculation and anticipation of threat. The underlying principle of anticipation, or prediction, is foundational to the operative logic of AI. The deployment of predictive, algorithmically driven systems in unmanned aerial systems (UAS) would therefore appear to be all but inevitable. However, the fatal interlocking of martial paradigms of pre-emption and models of predictive analysis needs to be questioned insofar as the irreparable decisiveness of a pre-emptive military strike is often at odds with the probabilistic predictions of AI. The pursuit of a human right to protect communities from aerial threats needs to therefore consider the degree to which algorithmic auguries—often erroneous but nevertheless evident in the prophetic mechanisms that power autonomous aerial apparatuses—essentially authorise and further galvanise the long-standing martial strategy of pre-emption. In the context of unmanned aerial systems, this essay will outline how AI actualises and summons forth “threats” through (i) the propositional logic of algorithms (their inclination to yield actionable directives); (ii) the systematic training of neural networks (through habitually biased methods of data-labelling); and (iii) a systemic reliance on models of statistical analysis in the structural design of machine learning (which can and do produce so-called “hallucinations”). Through defining the deterministic intentionality, systematic biases and systemic dysfunction of algorithms, I will identify how individuals and communities—configured upon and erroneously flagged through the machinations of so-called “black box” instruments—are invariably exposed to the uncertainty (or brute certainty) of imminent death based on algorithmic projections of “threat”.
PubDate: 2024-01-01
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00068-7
- Rights, space and air
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Mark Sealy, spoke at the London hearing of the Airspace Tribunal at Doughty Street Chambers on 21 September 2018. The hearing considered the case for and against a proposed new human right to protect the freedom to live without physical or psychological threat from above. The text below is developed from the evidence that he gave at the hearing.
PubDate: 2023-12-22
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00083-8
- Art, human rights, and threats from above
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract Art can present to people the dangers coming from above, like excessive surveillance, military attacks and climate change, which all threaten people's physical and mental well-being. Governments, however, also use art to legitimise new military and surveillance technologies. They often create seductive images which show the efficiency of these technologies, and they develop fiction related to pre-emptive measures which might try to predict and prevent crimes from occurring. In the last 20 years, especially after the 11 September terrorist attack, we have witnessed an essential change in the perception of human rights and reinterpretations of laws to allow pre-emptive strikes in the battle against terrorism. The concept of pre-crime, increased surveillance, and the belief that one can predict and prevent crimes have also altered the perceptions of subjectivity. While some critics regard human rights as obsolete or inefficient, political scientists like Claude Lefort have perceived them as always open to reinterpretation and expansion. People can invent new human rights. The increased threats from above require that we expand the existing rights corpus.
PubDate: 2023-12-19
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00077-6
- Remotely piloted aircraft systems: the introduction of the ‘flying
watchtower’-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract This commentary will contest that a lack of deep critical thinking on the nature of air power and its relationship with those it overflies, surveils, and bombs by air power practitioners can lead to a void in engagement with the public and create distrust. It will discuss how the unique characteristics of Remotely Piloted Aircraft Systems (RPAS) are critical to understanding their specific impact on those they overfly and their characterisation as ‘flying watchtowers’. The introduction of Predator and Reaper aircraft into the UK Royal Air Force (RAF) inventory will be used as a case study to explore this contention and to argue that the RAF and the Ministry of Defence should communicate more thoroughly and proactively about new technologies than they have done in the recent past. The paper will then consider what implications this might have for the introduction of future technologies. In doing so, it will highlight the importance of capturing lessons from the RAF’s recent experience of ‘wars of choice’ and counter-insurgency, however diverting the current global security challenges may be. In the context of the proposed new human right to protect the freedom to live without physical or psychological threat from above, recent research has demonstrated that the particular characteristics of RPAS may impact the mental health of those they surveil. This in turn may have implications both in terms of the behaviours it incites and considerations of proportionality in targeting decisions.
PubDate: 2023-12-19
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00073-w
- Armed drones: an instrument of terror
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The Author spent two decades in the US Military, starting in the early 1990s until she left the service in 2012. During her time in the military, she saw significant changes in military technology and, by extension, witnessed a significant change in aerial threats to civilian populations living in areas within and beyond declared war zones. Unlike the aerial bombardments of prior wars, the threats modern technology represents are persistent and unpredictable and leave no demographic unaffected because everyone is a potential target. In this way, people living in or near areas of armed conflict are subjected to persistent terror from the skies without respite or retreat. Using the author’s personal experience from within the drone program and travels to Afghanistan as a civilian to speak to those who lived in the most droned country on earth, she presents a solid argument for a new human right to live without physical or psychological threat from above.
PubDate: 2023-12-14
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00079-4
- The politics and ethics of threat from the air
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Abstract The proposed New Human Right to Protect the Freedom to Live Without Physical or Psychological Threat from Above is rooted in extensive and persuasive research on the harmful impacts of drone strikes in different parts of the world. While the proposal is inherently optimistic and positive, this paper considers four factors which, collectively, suggest that its implementation in the short-to-medium term is unlikely: the current international political climate; the political and tactical benefits of military drone use; an historical perspective showing psychological effects on civilians to be an intended aspect of air power since its inception; and an example of the desirability of psychological impact from military drone use.
PubDate: 2023-12-07
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00075-8
- How could we escape the sky'
-
Free pre-print version: Loading...
Rate this result:
What is this?
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating.
A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
PubDate: 2023-12-07
DOI: 10.1057/s42984-023-00070-z
|
Hybrid journal (It can contain Open Access articles)
