Rise of the Machines.

[Diogenes]

Something I worry about, amongst all the OTHER stuffI worry about.




http://www.smh.com.au/technology/sci-te ... 1d70m.html



I'm not afraid of autonomous machines. I'm afraid that bad people will someday command an Army of autonomous machines.

[choff]

I'm not afraid of autonomous machines. I'm afraid that bad people will someday command an Army of autonomous machines.[/quote]

Where can a bad person like me buy this army of autonomous machines?

[Diogenes]

I'm not afraid of autonomous machines. I'm afraid that bad people will someday command an Army of autonomous machines.

Where can a bad person like me buy this army of autonomous machines?[/quote]


It's like they say about the stock market. If someone has to explain it to you, you are already too late.

[hanelyp]

Where can a bad person like me buy this army of autonomous machines?

Buy? The true evil genius builds.

[Giorgio]

I'm not afraid of autonomous machines. I'm afraid that bad people will someday command an Army of autonomous machines.

Military commanders have been handling armies of autonomous machines called soldiers since the dawn of the human race.
Strategy wise it makes little difference if they are human or not.

[seedload]

I'm not afraid of autonomous machines. I'm afraid that bad people will someday command an Army of autonomous machines.

Yes, I agree. I can see it now. A bad person gets control of these machines and commands them to pelt us all with ping pong balls!

[Diogenes]

I'm not afraid of autonomous machines. I'm afraid that bad people will someday command an Army of autonomous machines.

Military commanders have been handling armies of autonomous machines called soldiers since the dawn of the human race.
Strategy wise it makes little difference if they are human or not.

Ah, but they are fallible, and able to refuse orders or change their loyalties. Imagine an army made up of soldiers that can shoot someone's head off 100 milliseconds after it appears around the corner of a wall or building. Imagine soldiers that will kill anything and everything in it's path with a rapidity completely unmatched by anything in history, completely unopposable by any mere human being.

Those "Terminator" movies are completely unrealistic. The killer robots in those movies are a weak and pathetic farce compared to what even today's technology can manage.

We are moving to produce machines that are capable of being super soldiers. They never sleep, they never tire, they can see in spectrums that humans cannot. They can detect, process, and shoot faster than a human can even realize there is a threat.

I can see in my mind's eye what is possible, and the notion that humans will have this capability is to me, very frightening. Do you want to see a pretty good system for robot muscles? It can be designed more powerful than humans and far faster.



http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/Science-F ... wsNum=1164

You may think I'm joking, but I am not. I can see how all the pieces can be made to fit together, and as Murray Gell-Mann said about quantum physics "Everything not forbidden is compulsory."

If this stuff is possible, somebody is going to do it. Those who would rule over us all will be at the controls.

[Diogenes]

http://tutorialfeed.net/development/jqu ... ecognition


Above is a link to a page showing what appears to be C++ algorithms for doing facial recognition on the fly. (real time.) It is a short step from locating a head to aiming a gun at it.

This is why I say a Robot could shoot your head off 100 ms after it shows up within it's video range. Calibrated accurately, it simply wouldn't miss. Ever.

[Giorgio]

If this stuff is possible, somebody is going to do it. Those who would rule over us all will be at the controls.

I am also sure that sooner or later it will be possible, no questioning about it.
I was merely pointing out that it will not be much different than today.
After all also today the one who rule are at the controls.

[Diogenes]

If this stuff is possible, somebody is going to do it. Those who would rule over us all will be at the controls.

I am also sure that sooner or later it will be possible, no questioning about it.
I was merely pointing out that it will not be much different than today.
After all also today the one who rule are at the controls.

Today we can resist.

[Giorgio]

Today we can resist.

Why do you think that tomorrow you will not be able to resist?

After all if the Rulers will have the tech to make combat bots it will be probably a known and distributed tech in the end. It will be stupid to resist by person if we could resist with our own bots.
Of course their will be much better than our, but isn't it the same now with soldiers and weapons?

That's why I was stating that it won't be different except for the change in strategy. Don't you think?

[bcglorf]

I'm actually rather surprised that with all the automated drones about there isn't a greater usage of similar equipment just mounted on wheels instead.

As for Diogenes concerns, I share them. The only solution for it seems to be make sure that we are the ones that get the best ones first, just like every other game changing weapon out there.

As for change, they will represent a significant one to combat. If they can be fully automated and don't require a human at the controls of each bot, there is nothing stopping a single human with a large factory from having 100k bots at their sole command. That is a very big deal if you ask me.

[ladajo]

There are autonomous ground and water borne vehicles. They are capable of being armed as well as conducting independant area patrols and surveillance.

The boat based system is actually fairly smart. It was tested last year in San Diego. And involved multiple units operating in cooperative fashion. AFAIK the land based counterparts are still working out the robust cooperative mode.

[Diogenes]

Today we can resist.

Why do you think that tomorrow you will not be able to resist?

After all if the Rulers will have the tech to make combat bots it will be probably a known and distributed tech in the end. It will be stupid to resist by person if we could resist with our own bots.
Of course their will be much better than our, but isn't it the same now with soldiers and weapons?

That's why I was stating that it won't be different except for the change in strategy. Don't you think?

Incrementalism.

We have an Army. It is made of people. Were it ordered to slaughter an American city it would refuse. Were it ordered to slaughter an Enemy city it would do so.

We are slowly replacing the unreliable human component with unquestioning machines that can be controlled from half a world away. (Predator Drone) As we slowly enhance our capability, war fighters are given ever improving equipment to work with. As machines cycle in, humans can eventually be cycled out. (No more Fighter pilots in the future.)

One of our safeguards for tyranny is the human component. As the rise of the machines makes fewer and fewer humans necessary to perform the mission, extrapolation would indicate that at some point we won't need any, or perhaps a very few.

The more power is distributed, the less likely it will be abused. The more concentrated power becomes, the more likely it will be abused. As they continuously improve warbots, many will applaud their capabilities and how much easier they make the job of warfighters.

But what happens when so few people are required that a coup becomes possible? The military edge will be a quantum leap over what amateur civilians could produce. Besides, if the tyranny starts at the top, they start out with an unbeatable edge.

Put a million "terminator" style robots in the army requiring only a few human overseers, then who could stop them? Maybe an EM pulse weapon. But if the threat comes from within a nation, the only people who might have such a weapon are the ones in control of the machines.

[ladajo]

Bolo