Jump to content
Forbin

The threat of Big Dog

Recommended Posts

I agree that the source of war is the bigger problem but I don't think that invalidates the concern that killing seems to be getting much easier to do and more impersonal, that's the part that worries me.

 

I can see why ease of killing would be a worry but why the impersonal part?  Unless you think impersonal killing is a problem because it makes killing easier (which is probably true)?

 

And about the ease of killing, I would say that what we actually ought to be worried about is how much easier it is for people with advanced weapons to kill people without (because those with same weapons would be difficult to get to or situation results in MAD).  Which is something I could probably rant about the whole resource accumulation and its meaning in context of technological advances and why tech education (not fear and aversion, but embracing it) is key to combat that growing snowball but I'm sure I've ranted way too much about things...

 

You know, kinda like how you were joking about how impoverished black kids should make these high tech tools... cause they probably should.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's like complaining about how terrible drone strikes are in middle east because they are done by drones.  No, they are fucking terrible because someone decided to kill (yes, choosing to launch these automatic weapons system is with complete intent to kill) bunch of other people for some dubious reasons.  All this middle-ware blaming is letting that decision makers go unnoticed.

 

All of which is enabled by the massive change in the political calculus that occurs when weapons systems that don't put troops into harms way are introduced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of which is enabled by the massive change in the political calculus that occurs when weapons systems that don't put troops into harms way are introduced.

 

Then either you want to go with MAD (which I bitterly/reluctantly support) or are you seriously suggesting that military should actively sabotage their own troop's safety to make war more costly in their own human life?  Cause that's like, never going to happen in same political system where wars become easier to manage politically due to lower cost in human lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying that I find something inevitable and unsettling is a long way from arguing that it should be prohibited.

 

Beyond that, I hardly see how MAD applies to the introduction of drone warfare. Nearly every conflict that the states at the cutting edge of weaponized drone development have engaged in since WWII has been asymmetric.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying that I find something inevitable and unsettling is a long way from arguing that it should be prohibited.

 

Beyond that, I hardly see how MAD applies to the introduction of drone warfare. Nearly every conflict that the states at the cutting edge of weaponized drone development have engaged in since WWII has been asymmetric.

 

Fair enough.

 

About the latter, idea would be to better arm potential 'punching bags' of these modern asymmetrical conflicts so that they are no longer 'punching bags'.  So MAD is probably too strong of terminology, but enough punch so that they are no longer just defenseless targets.  Or better alternative would be to pursue economical equivalent (too important economically to fight) and pursue strategy of deference I suppose.

 

Edit: NVM about this part

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crawling over the rubble of your ruined civilization

 

 

(Also

)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will Smith from Tested got an interview with someone from Intel working on those robot spiders O_O

 

 

He forgot the most important question: How do you kill them?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Go ahead and break this robot’s legs. It can figure out how to chase you without them

 

In a study published Wednesday in Nature, researchers report a robot that can adapt to "injury" by quickly learning to move in spite of damaged limbs. In less than two minutes, the six-legged creature can learn to compensate for two broken legs. Using the same technique, the researchers also created a robotic arm that could continue to move objects in spite of multiple malfunctioning motors.

 

Since the picture files didn't allow pasting, equivalent example:

pic005.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the revolution comes, the cats will side with the robots. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the revolution comes, the cats will side with the robots. 

 

Deep down, I always knew. He's sure to survive the rise of the robots, and outlast me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what's the countdown on someone giving a stage presentation or a Ted talk or something on robotics that ends with the presenter pulling off their faceplate while the real person who created them walks onstage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×