Screw this...

[Ross Mead]

Screw this...  

I'm glad to see that we're doing something useful with modern technology... :-x

[William Grim]

NK and SK are still technically at war with an armistice; I don't see how this could hurt SK's defense.  I mean, if you were faced with spending $1 million to train and maintain a soldier or pay $1 million for 5 of these, what would you do?

[Ross Mead]

Code Select Expand

if you were faced with spending $1 million to train and maintain a soldier or pay $1 million for 5 of these, what would you do?
Oh cool, now we can fight for less!  Ahh, the American dream...

Don't get me wrong, I understand that this holds promise for the justified defense of South Korea.  However, the implications of this extend way beyond that of the conflict between North Korea and South Korea--what country wouldn't love to have an automated cannon doing the work of their bordering troops?  The next inevitable step is to mount this stationary turret onto some sort of mobile vehicle and, of course, automate that vehicle.  This sort of technology has been pushed for years by various militaries, namely, our own.  In 2001, Congress mandated that one-third of all ground vehicles be unmanned by 2015; while the DARPA Grand Challenges help provide many applications to the public, there is a still a primary focus on the military perspective.  I don't think this should be what's driving the research of this kind of technology for the next few years.

[raptor]

Drone guns have existed for a very long time.  This one just seems to have more advanced "human" recognition software.  And even though a machine with a gun isn't a great idea, you must admit that some of the greatest innovations in man's time have been developed due to military backing.

[Shaun Martin]

<-- Ross

[blacklee]

I don't think this should be what's driving the research of this kind of technology for the next few years.

Sure. Why? We can send Joe next door to risk his life, and all happily work on a better microwave.
Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think using technology to kill people is a noble idea, but emphasis should be on "not killing people," and not on "using technology."
Unfortunately, I don’t believe we have a choice. Well, there is one. We could wait until some other countries' military technology is better than ours, and they attack first. Then we will fight them with our advanced microwaves.

Oh cool, now we can fight for less!  Ahh, the American dream...

[raptor]

Look out!! In the trees!! Its charlie.. no wait a minute its, a microwaved hotpocket  :-? NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!

[Shaun Martin]

 

[William Grim]

Does this hotpocket have poisoned needles in it?  Needles so small you don't even know they're penetrating your mouth?  That's a pretty deadly hotpocket.

[Ross Mead]

We can send Joe next door to risk his life

The risk of Joe losing his life provides incentive for a country not to go to war; however, no one is going to mourn the loss of robotic ATV unit X51 for being shot to bits.

[sarcastic_rant]
I mean, why think twice about going to war if no one cares about the losses?  In the same respect, robotic units cost money--maybe that will be the significant loss that people actually consider; ya' know, 'cuz it wouldn't be right if we delved deeper into the pockets of everyone (i.e., the taxpayers); that wouldn't be unfair, would it?
[/sarcastic_rant]

[E]mphasis should be on "not killing people"... nfortunately, I don’t believe we have a choice. Well, there is one. We could wait until some other countries' military technology is better than ours, and they attack first."

That's what I'm getting at--if we focus on "not killing people" and we're truly successful at it, then there shouldn't be an army to fight against.  Of course, I do have a rather idealistic (and, of course, unrealistic) perspective on the world.  Like I said, I do think that this type of thing is inevitable--I think it will happen.  I choose to make it clear to people that the use of this technology for what it is designed for (weapons and war) is, I believe, ethically wrong.

Thanks for the feedback! :-)

[William Grim]

If it's the enemy pointing their advanced weaponry at me because we didn't do our own R&D on killing machines or us pointing our weapons at them when the time arises, I know where I want to be.  While some people find it ethically wrong to develop this, I find it even more ethically wrong to let the enemy become more powerful than your own people and then be unable to protect them.

[thatguy]

Heaven forbid we take the high road and work on building defensive items.  Nope, screw that... Let's kill stuff.

The human race is not above the other animals; we are just higher functioning and thereby have the ability to BS in a sad attempt to justify our barbaric behavior.

Seriously, â€ËÅ"The other guys are doing it’?  We should not put our efforts in sinking to the lowest common denominator.  We should put our efforts into raising it.

We will truly be on the path to being an evolved species when we can base our actions not on the fears, but on the hopes and ideals, in our hearts.

[Kit]

thatguy wrote:
Heaven forbid we take the high road and work on building defensive items.  Nope, screw that... Let's kill stuff.

I think they were probably going for protection like Grim was saying; not killing people.

IMO, I'd rather be safe at home fighting with a robot than risking my life. But then again, I think a good round of Mario Kart could solve a lot of the world's problems.  :-D

[Ross Mead]

If it's the enemy pointing their advanced weaponry at me because we didn't do our own R&D on killing machines or us pointing our weapons at them when the time arises, I know where I want to be.

While I agree that I'd like to be the one behind this wall of protection, I'm arguing that we shouldn't be so intent on trying to establish these walls at all.  What I'm trying to say is that we stress building weapons (for both offense and defense) instead of trying to actually resolve conflict in a reasonable manner.  Conflict resolution takes patience, and, unfortunately, we are often unwilling (as is our opposition) to offer such patience.

Also note that I was referring to the future implications of this technology, namely, strapping it onto a mobile vehicle, which will, inevitably, become automated itself.  Additionally, we must be reminded that once a robotic military makes its way through another robotic military, it eventually must contend with human beings (armed or unarmed, it does not matter).  At this point, the fight becomes very one sided--and this is, arguably, good in the case of war; however, war is, arguably, bad in the case of the survival of the human race.

I just don't see the point where the fighting stops.  True peace does not come from threats and force, but from discussion and compromise.  Admittedly, the latter system can be shown to be drastically less efficient than the first; however, it it can also be shown that the latter produces better results overall.  The question is, are We patient enough to wait?

We will truly be on the path to being an evolved species when we can base our actions not on the fears, but on the hopes and ideals, in our hearts.

[William Grim]

Eh, it's just a fact of life.  When they stop building weapons, we can stop building weapons.  However, since no one is going to stop building weapons because of the probable fact that jealousy or some other factor is going to continue to make others advance their weaponry, we will continue to advance ours.  Not much to do about it; I think the best to do is to stay ahead and attempt not to use them.  It's pretty much the same thing that has always been happening in nature: survival of the fittest.

About robotic armies tearing down humans, why didn't the atomic bomb do the same thing?  Plenty of people have them these days, but I think I can say why: humans do not like killing other humans.

Sure, you get some crazies out there, but in situations like that, you very literally just have to kill them in war should a war be started.  It sounds sadistic and evil, but it's all about protecting yourself.  I'm sure if someone was trying to kill you and no one could help you but yourself and you had your chance to kill them first, you'd do it.