PDA

View Full Version : Killer robots... coming to a war zone near you!



t0p
November 20th, 2012, 01:55 AM
Skynet has become self-aware, and is now diverting government defence funds into robotics research (http://bit.ly/TNcLXU). Be afraid. Be very afraid.

StuFranks
November 20th, 2012, 11:05 AM
As long as they aren't already developing a T-1000 right now I think we're ok! :P

Paqman
November 20th, 2012, 11:34 AM
Meh. There's already plenty of autonomous weapons on the battlefield. Landmines, booby traps, off-route mines, etc. There will be more in the future, so what?

t0p
November 20th, 2012, 11:55 AM
Meh. There's already plenty of autonomous weapons on the battlefield. Landmines, booby traps, off-route mines, etc. There will be more in the future, so what?

If a civilian steps on a mine and is blown to smithereens, that can be deemed an accident (though making unexploded cluster-bombs look like humanitarian aid packages was a bit stupid...). But if an autonomous robot soldier misidentifies non-combatants as enemy soldiers because of a programming or electronic glitch and wastes a school-full of children, that will be deemed less acceptable.

Current autonomous weapons are generally passive/defensive, like the Phalanx system designed to destroy incoming missiles. But the Terminator is far from passive...

EDIT: Anyway the use of unmarked mine fields already "illegal" under "international law" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_mine). [1997 Convention on the Prohibition of the Use, Stockpiling, Production and Transfer of Anti-Personnel Mines and on their Destruction]

zombifier25
November 20th, 2012, 03:55 PM
On the other hand, future wars will be fought by robots between robots, so less casualties. On another hand however, if they managed to find their ways into civilization,... I guess that will be deemed illegal.

weasel fierce
November 20th, 2012, 04:18 PM
On the other hand, future wars will be fought by robots between robots, so less casualties. On another hand however, if they managed to find their ways into civilization,... I guess that will be deemed illegal.

Not quite. Future wars will be fought between robots on one side, and brown people with soviet-era small arms on the other.

A "cleaner" kind of war, so the people back home don't have to deal with all the pesky dying business. Maybe we can even televise it as a sport, like in Forever Peace

Gremlinzzz
November 20th, 2012, 09:24 PM
Robots can replace the need for a human army.Just hope those who control these Killing machines don't decide to thin the human herd.
The drone seems to be replacing assassination squad's.
so Killer robots are in play,there hereee

Jakin
November 20th, 2012, 09:39 PM
I think its more likely that future wars will be carried out buy Corporate empires. With their own armies, that have staked out a territory in space, and will fight over the rights for the resources of said territory with rival Corporate empires.
Than worrying about armies of humanoid machines with slurred austrian accents, ravaging the country sides, and our backyards.

Paqman
November 20th, 2012, 11:08 PM
On the other hand, future wars will be fought by robots between robots

Unlikely. Wars are fought for control of things humans consider valuable enough to fight over: habitable regions, essential resources, populations, etc. Often the whole point of a war is to control or restrict the activities of other humans. There may be engagements at a tactical level between unmanned combatants, but the strategic objectives will be all about the humans.

TL;DR: What prize for victory on a depopulated battlefield?

sdowney717
November 22nd, 2012, 03:01 AM
How do you efficiently power a battlefield autonomous robot?
Batteries are not enough.

When you think about it, life form is pretty amazing.

Paqman
November 22nd, 2012, 10:24 AM
How do you efficiently power a battlefield autonomous robot?
Batteries are not enough.


Nothing wrong with an internal combustion engine (eg: diesel, gas turbine, etc) for most roles. Why would powering a robot be any different from powering any other machine?



When you think about it, life form is pretty amazing.

Absolutely. The human brain uses about 20W of power, and is much more powerful computationally than massive computers. All up a human only uses about 100W, the only reason we have to take on so much energy is that the way we convert fuel to energy is quite inefficient.

sdowney717
November 22nd, 2012, 11:48 AM
Nothing wrong with an internal combustion engine (eg: diesel, gas turbine, etc) for most roles. Why would powering a robot be any different from powering any other machine?


The examples I see in the news all are powered by batteries or are hooked up to wires. You could use some kind of fuel cell tech, perhaps methanol or ammonia. Reason for not using IC engine is heat and noise which might be very easy to locate by an enemy. You may desire a stealth robot force. The power packs for robots are bulky and large, nothing like you will see coming out of Hollywood movies.

Paqman
November 22nd, 2012, 12:17 PM
Reason for not using IC engine is heat and noise which might be very easy to locate by an enemy.

No more so than any other military vehicle.

They may say "robot" and you immediately think of something humanoid with legs, but in reality you're probably going to be talking about something with wheels, treads or wings.

There are some protoype military robots with legs for rough terrain, but they use an ICE too. And are damn creepy looking (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W1czBcnX1Ww).


You may desire a stealth robot force.

Indeed you might. Stealthy air vehicles still use gas turbines though. Really depends what kind of "robot" you're building.

sdowney717
November 22nd, 2012, 12:36 PM
I have seen that dog like robot and it is very very loud. Imagine a bunch of those being used will be like hearing many chainsaws giving away your position. Honda has a generator that is very quiet so maybe they can make it more stealthy.

Paqman
November 22nd, 2012, 01:17 PM
I have seen that dog like robot and it is very very loud. Imagine a bunch of those being used will be like hearing many chainsaws giving away your position. Honda has a generator that is very quiet so maybe they can make it more stealthy.

Yeah, seems like the whole point of that thing would be to get gear from the back of a truck across some rough terrain to where the boys were parked. So still way too noisy, but it's a prototype and probably designed purely to test the walking control system. The power plant could be changed later in the design cycle for something more appropriate.

kurt18947
November 22nd, 2012, 05:18 PM
Unlikely. Wars are fought for control of things humans consider valuable enough to fight over: habitable regions, essential resources, populations, etc. Often the whole point of a war is to control or restrict the activities of other humans. There may be engagements at a tactical level between unmanned combatants, but the strategic objectives will be all about the humans.

TL;DR: What prize for victory on a depopulated battlefield?

I think that was one of the goals of a recent global conflict? Lebensraum?

Paqman
November 22nd, 2012, 05:33 PM
I think that was one of the goals of a recent global conflict? Lebensraum?

Yup. Exactly my point.

sffvba[e0rt
November 22nd, 2012, 09:30 PM
I think that was one of the goals of a recent global conflict? Lebensraum?


Yup. Exactly my point.

I would suggest tip-toeing this conversation back into talking about the robot's and less about war and associated concepts.


404

sdowney717
November 22nd, 2012, 11:13 PM
here is a new one called switchblade
with some video of how it works.
launched like a rocket it then is flown to the enemy target with video feedback where it can be detonated.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=69f_1304308604

Looks like it will be effective deadly and I wonder though at the cost of all this new technology.

Paqman
November 23rd, 2012, 10:40 AM
I would suggest tip-toeing this conversation back into talking about the robot's and less about war and associated concepts.


Well, it's the cafe, so as long as we keep the politics out we're ok, right?

spynappels
November 23rd, 2012, 02:04 PM
Power is no problem, just ask Tom Cruise for the doohickey he had in Knight and Day!
Oh wait....

sdowney717
November 23rd, 2012, 02:17 PM
Autonomy is the real goal, giving the robots some intelligence to make decisions.
Seems the generals have been watching a lot of scifi movies.
I think that killer robots could employ drug or chemical means to neutralize enemy combatants, perhaps cyanide tipped micro darts. Make these robots really small buglike and have them fly in for the kill. Employ tens of thousands of robotic flies. How would you keep them from killing your own?

I feel like we are going to see horrible new robotic methods for warfare. I have read that computing power will soon be many tens of thousands of times greater on the micro chips.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2141694/What-possibly-wrong-U-S-Army-wants-war-robots-power-make-decisions.html

mythic97
November 24th, 2012, 11:42 PM
I just hope they run windows so if they go self aware BSOD or something if they used Linux we are doomed so fast updating so reliable killing machines....

Paqman
November 25th, 2012, 12:17 AM
I just hope they run windows so if they go self aware BSOD or something if they used Linux we are doomed so fast updating so reliable killing machines....

Hey, if they're on your side you want them to work. It's the other guy's robots you want to glitch out.

Bandit
November 25th, 2012, 03:27 AM
How do you efficiently power a battlefield autonomous robot?
Batteries are not enough.

Small plutonium reactor. Very stable, runs cooler, if leakage happens surrounding area only suffers radiation for a few decades -vs- centuries w/ uranium.

Incase you wonder why we dont use it more often, simple the government cant make weapons grade material from it..

sisco311
November 25th, 2012, 04:09 AM
D'oh! We are all doomed.

Latest news:

Woodmov, the robot created by Isaac Asimov and programmed by Woody Allen, just declared:


They did not take me in the Army. I was, um, interestingly enough, I was, I was 4-P. Yes. In the, in the event of war, I'm a hostage.

Woodmov wasn't too optimistic about the future of the human race, but we still might have a chance to survive... She didn't revealed the details, but she said:

I have a plan

...

Paqman
November 25th, 2012, 07:28 PM
Small plutonium reactor. Very stable, runs cooler, if leakage happens surrounding area only suffers radiation for a few decades -vs- centuries w/ uranium.

Incase you wonder why we dont use it more often, simple the government cant make weapons grade material from it..

Are you sure you're thinking of plutonium? Plutonium is way, way, way more radioactive than uranium, and extremely toxic. It's also much easier to use for weapons than uranium. All uranium reactors do make plutonium, which is one of the main reasons why a uranium fuel cycle was so attractive to countries during the cold war and why alternative fuel cycles like thorium were never shown much love.

Bandit
November 25th, 2012, 08:12 PM
Are you sure you're thinking of plutonium? Plutonium is way, way, way more radioactive than uranium, and extremely toxic. It's also much easier to use for weapons than uranium. All uranium reactors do make plutonium, which is one of the main reasons why a uranium fuel cycle was so attractive to countries during the cold war and why alternative fuel cycles like thorium were never shown much love.

lord i thought it was plutonium.. May have to double check myself on that one.. Old age is getting to my noggin these days, lol,,,


Yea I was thinking bass ackards, it was Thorium http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium_fuel_cycle