Skynet is coming.

[ladajo]

"We are already there and have been for while. There are many systems that are not target specific, nor require human intervention once placed in service. Why do you not understand this? Are you familiar with the Aegis Weapons System? Are you familiar with Tomahawk Block E? Are you familiar with modern mines and mobile mines? Are you familiar with Advanced Capability Torpedoes? How about automated perimeter or point defense systems?"

I specifically included several of these, in the category of sensor fuzed weapons. They protect specific areas, and against very carefully delimited target profiles. There won't be too many innocent aircraft coming at a carrier at a few hundred miles per hour.

It is a matter of several orders of magnitude of difference, morally and negatively so, for a drone to be given a few GPS points on a map bounding a territory and then be lofted with it having autonomy to kill anything that looks vaguely interesting, regardless of proximity to or posture towards blue forces.

I see this simply as a matter of settings. It also speaks to me that you are not fully familiar with how the above mentioned and many other systems function. No stink on you, just an observation. You can do exactly the same thing with doctrine statements in Aegis for instance. You can tell it to monitor an area and give it autonomy to kill anything that looks vaguely interesting, regardless of proximity to or posture towards blue forces. I truly fail to see the difference you are trying to cite.

[TDPerk]

"I see this simply as a matter of settings. It also speaks to me that you are not fully familiar with how the above mentioned and many other systems function."

No. No. NO.

It is of course a matter of settings. What you are not acknowledging is that they are going to be setting these drones in a morally unacceptable manner. It is what they are planning on doing, it is being discussed openly.

[ladajo]

I don't think I see your point clearly now.

I am saying that in general, the media articles that pop up here and there are more or less hype on capabilities (and intent).
I am also saying that 'fire and forget' autonomous systems have been around for years with the capability to be deployed and independantly seek and destroy targets. My point being that this is nothing new.

I think that you are saying that there is a difference between existing systems (legacy in some cases) and those that are on the table now. If this is so, I completely disagree. I see no difference in them from what has been around.

I think that you are now moving away from what I understood as your previous point (above) and now saying I don't get the moral implications of using autonomous systems.

What you are not acknowledging is that they are going to be setting these drones in a morally unacceptable manner

I would point out that the exisitng and legacy systems have heavy controls in place on targeting settings and weapons breaks that there is absoloutely no impetus to change at this point. The lawyers are always all over it.

[paperburn1]

My question is why is GOOGLE buying up all these robotics company. 8 in as many months?

[DeltaV]

And why was Atlas presented to the media in PRC? This could get messy.

Google acquires robotic experts Boston Dynamics

Bipedal humanoid robot "Atlas", primarily developed by the American robotics company Boston Dynamics, is presented to the media during a news conference at the University of Hong Kong October 17, 2013. Google recently acquired the company. (Reuters)

[DeltaV]

Darpa’s Robotic Gladiators Will Battle on This Disaster Course

Rome, 2013. Next up, robot-human combat to entertain the masses.

[DeltaV]

SCHAFT team tops scores at DARPA Robotics Challenge

[Diogenes]

Meet NASA's Valkyrie: A SILKY BUSTY ROBO-MINX that'll save your life

The 1.9-metre tall, 125kg droid has interchangeable arms that can be swapped out by removing a single bolt and connector, and three fingers and a thumb on each hand that exceed a human's in strength. It also has an impressive cleavage, thanks to the linear actuators that allow it to swivel, and a glowing NASA icon that looks straight out of Iron Man.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/12/11 ... your_life/

[paperburn1]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/06/23 ... ds/?page=3

like skynet
“U.S defense, intel and homeland security officials are constructing a parallel world, on a computer, which the agencies will use to test propaganda messages and military strategies.Called the Sentient World Simulation, the program uses AI routines based upon the psychological theories of Marty Seligman, among others. (Seligman introduced the theory of ‘learned helplessness’ in the 1960s, after shocking beagles until they cowered, urinating, on the bottom of their cages.)

[Diogenes]

Robots to Replace Troops on the Battlefield

The Pentagon is considering replacing thousands of troops with robots, a military commander said recently, marking the first time a DOD official has publicly acknowledged that humans would be replaced with robots on the battlefield.

Gen. Robert Cone, head of the Army Training and Doctrine Command, made the comment at the Army Aviation symposium on Jan. 15, according to a report in Defense News, a trade publication covering the military. He said that robots would allow for “a smaller, more lethal, deployable and agile force.”

- See more at: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/ ... fJcLx.dpuf


Now who coulda seen that comming?

[ladajo]

“I’ve got clear guidance to think about what if you could robotically perform some of the tasks in terms of maneuverability, in terms of the future of the force,” Cone said. - See more at: http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/ ... YoMBc.dpuf

This is about mobility not fire power.

Although there will be some fires component, I am sure. A lot of fires is already automated. It is really the magazine reload and fault revoery that requires folks to be on-hand right now. Not the tube cycling.

In terms of operational functions, robots fit nitches.

ISR
Fires
Maneuver
Sustainment
Force Protection
Command & Control

It does not take much thought to see that you can reduce human burden, especially in the "admin" lanes of the functions. When I say "admin", I refer to repetitive/cyclic mechanics that do not require much dynamics in process. Static components of functions if you will. That is the main money maker for freeing up man power. The next big money maker would be risk reduction. I see that playing more in ISR, Maneuver and FP. Maybe you could extend that to high risk sustainment, but I think that depends on the nature of the risk (be-it force or mission impacting).

Meh.

[ladajo]

<Deleted Duplicate Post>

[choff]

Skynet is coming!

http://www.break.com/video/ugc/robot-ch ... bot-368859

[Stubby]

Google buys AI company to go with their robotic defense contractor


http://www.pcworld.com/article/2091500/ ... pmind.html

[Diogenes]

Predator drone helps convict North Dakota farmer in first case of its kind

Rodney Brossart, who was accused at the time of stealing six cows from a neighbor, was arrested after a summer-long standoff in 2011. Authorities say Brossart family members refused to allow deputies on their farmstead and didn't show up for court hearings.

The case drew widespread attention because police used a military-style unmanned drone to conduct surveillance on the Brossart farm. Brossart was found not guilty of stealing the cows and got six months in prison over the police standoff, Forbes reported.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/01/28/fi ... tor-drone/