A lethal autonomous weapon is a machine that locates, selects and engages human targets without human
supervision.[o] Widely available AI tools can be used by bad actors to develop inexpensive autonomous
weapons and, if produced at scale, they are potentially weapons of mass destruction.[248] Even when used
in conventional warfare, it is unlikely that they will be unable to reliably choose targets and could
potentially kill an innocent person.[248] In 2014, 30 nations (including China) supported a ban on
autonomous weapons under the United Nations' Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, however
the United States and others disagreed.[249] By 2015, over fifty countries were reported to be researching
battlefield robots.[250]
AI tools make it easier for authoritarian governments to efficiently control their citizens in several ways.
Face and voice recognition allow widespread surveillance. Machine learning, operating this data, can
classify potential enemies of the state and prevent them from hiding. Recommendation systems can
precisely target propaganda and misinformation for maximum effect. Deepfakes and generative AI aid in
producing misinformation. Advanced AI can make authoritarian centralized decision making more
competitive than liberal and decentralized systems such as markets. It lowers the cost and difficulty of
digital warfare and advanced spyware.[251] All these technologies have been available since 2020 or
earlier—AI facial recognition systems are already being used for mass surveillance in China.[252][253]
There many other ways that AI is expected to help bad actors, some of which can not be foreseen. For
example, machine-learning AI is able to design tens of thousands of toxic molecules in a matter of
hours.[254]
Economists have frequently highlighted the risks of redundancies from AI, and speculated about
unemployment if there is no adequate social policy for full employment.[255]
In the past, technology has tended to increase rather than reduce total employment, but economists
acknowledge that "we're in uncharted territory" with AI.[256] A survey of economists showed
disagreement about whether the increasing use of robots and AI will cause a substantial increase in long-
term unemployment, but they generally agree that it could be a net benefit if productivity gains are
redistributed.[257] Risk estimates vary; for example, in the 2010s, Michael Osborne and Carl Benedikt
Frey estimated 47% of U.S. jobs are at "high risk" of potential automation, while an OECD report
classified only 9% of U.S. jobs as "high risk".[p][259] The methodology of speculating about future
employment levels has been criticised as lacking evidential foundation, and for implying that technology,
rather than social policy, creates unemployment, as opposed to redundancies.[255] In April 2023, it was
reported that 70% of the jobs for Chinese video game illustrators had been eliminated by generative
artificial intelligence.[260][261]
Unlike previous waves of automation, many middle-class jobs may be eliminated by artificial
intelligence; The Economist stated in 2015 that "the worry that AI could do to white-collar jobs what
steam power did to blue-collar ones during the Industrial Revolution" is "worth taking seriously".[262]
Jobs at extreme risk range from paralegals to fast food cooks, while job demand is likely to increase for
care-related professions ranging from personal healthcare to the clergy.[263]
From the early days of the development of artificial intelligence, there have been arguments, for example,
those put forward by Joseph Weizenbaum, about whether tasks that can be done by computers actually
should be done by them, given the difference between computers and humans, and between quantitative
Technological unemployment