| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
CTrees
Joined: 21 Jul 2006
Posts: 3493
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 7:39 pm Post subject: In the World of They're Going to Kill Us All! |
 |
|
(there were two ItWoS XLIIIs)
Source
| Quote: | Packs of robots will hunt down uncooperative humans
The latest request from the Pentagon jars the senses. At least, it did mine. They are looking for contractors to provide a "Multi-Robot Pursuit System" that will let packs of robots "search for and detect a non-cooperative human".
One thing that really bugs defence chiefs is having their troops diverted from other duties to control robots. So having a pack of them controlled by one person makes logistical sense. But I'm concerned about where this technology will end up.
Given that iRobot last year struck a deal with Taser International to mount stun weapons on its military robots, how long before we see packs of droids hunting down pesky demonstrators with paralysing weapons? Or could the packs even be lethally armed? I asked two experts on automated weapons what they thought - click the continue reading link to read what they said.
[Both were concerned that packs of robots would be entrusted with tasks - and weapons - they were not up to handling without making wrong decisions.
Steve Wright of Leeds Metropolitan University is an expert on police and military technologies, and last year correctly predicted this pack-hunting mode of operation would happen. "The giveaway here is the phrase 'a non-cooperative human subject'," he told me:
"What we have here are the beginnings of something designed to enable robots to hunt down humans like a pack of dogs. Once the software is perfected we can reasonably anticipate that they will become autonomous and become armed.
We can also expect such systems to be equipped with human detection and tracking devices including sensors which detect human breath and the radio waves associated with a human heart beat. These are technologies already developed."
Another commentator often in the news for his views on military robot autonomy is Noel Sharkey, an AI and robotics engineer at the University of Sheffield. He says he can understand why the military want such technology, but also worries it will be used irresponsibly.
"This is a clear step towards one of the main goals of the US Army's Future Combat Systems project, which aims to make a single soldier the nexus for a large scale robot attack. Independently, ground and aerial robots have been tested together and once the bits are joined, there will be a robot force under command of a single soldier with potentially dire consequences for innocents around the corner."
What do you make of this? Are we letting our militaries run technologically amok with our tax dollars? Or can robot soldiers be programmed to be even more ethical than human ones, as some researchers claim? |
Last edited by CTrees on Wed Oct 29, 2008 12:30 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Feiticeira
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 1697
Location: Incinerating things that are untrue
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
uh
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mini J
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 1097
Location: Toronto, ON
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess they haven't seen the movies.
Oh well. I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords.
_________________
Who needs a signature? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sam
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 8567
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
for the hundredth time
they're going to kill us all |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Monkey Mcdermott
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 2379
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 8:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OH SHIT
COMMUNIST ROBOTS!?
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nathan
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 6269
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gives me visions of Niven's Motie warriors.
Science fiction thought experiment: If pseudo-autonomous militarized droids work their way into law enforcement and an innocent person dies as the result of a bug (eg. operator error is ruled out), can/would charges be brought against the programmer responsible for the bad code? More and more we are going to use technology to externalize decision-trees that used to require a human, and for which a human has always been held legally responsible. As that technology becomes increasingly autonomous, to what extent will we hold coders responsible for decisions they did not make, but inarguably caused?
_________________
All our final decisions are made in a state of mind that is not going to last. - Marky Mark Proust |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WheelsOfConfusion
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 10741
Location: Unknown Kaddath
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
I suppose you could hold both the police department and the manufacturers responsible.
_________________
  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arc Tempest
Joined: 28 Jan 2007
Posts: 4447
Location: Oregon
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nathan wrote: | | Gives me visions of Niven's Motie warriors. |
I was thinking more like the hound from Fahrenheit 451...
Creepy either way.
_________________
The older I get, the more certain I become of one thing. True and abiding cynicism is simply a form of cowardice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darqcyde
Joined: 11 Jul 2006
Posts: 8366
Location: A false vacuum abiding in ignorance.
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 4:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| WheelsOfConfusion wrote: | | I suppose you could hold both the police department and the manufacturers responsible. |
That's when the real finger pointing fun would begin with one saying that a faulty product was delivered while the other would claim that the product was misused.
_________________
...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.
http://12ozlb.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sam
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 8567
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| nathan wrote: | | Science fiction thought experiment: If pseudo-autonomous militarized droids work their way into law enforcement and an innocent person dies as the result of a bug (eg. operator error is ruled out), can/would charges be brought against the programmer responsible for the bad code? More and more we are going to use technology to externalize decision-trees that used to require a human, and for which a human has always been held legally responsible. As that technology becomes increasingly autonomous, to what extent will we hold coders responsible for decisions they did not make, but inarguably caused? |
Wow this is like a lawyerly-minded passenger on the titanic was musing about whether or not icebergs could be charged with polluting the atlantic with free-floating desk chairs left after a collision it doesn't matter don't you see it doesn't matter you're all dead they killed you they killed us all |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Arc Tempest
Joined: 28 Jan 2007
Posts: 4447
Location: Oregon
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 4:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'm beginning to think Sam has robot issues.
_________________
The older I get, the more certain I become of one thing. True and abiding cynicism is simply a form of cowardice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sam
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 8567
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sam
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 8567
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 6:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
When we made robots that could read minds.
When we made robots that ate meat to sustain themselves.
When we made robots that simulated the soft breathing of charming japanese girls.
When we made robots that attempted to replicate themselves using organic salvage in the same year that we started seriously researching robots to care for the elderly.
When we had incidents of robots 'accidentally' labeling humans as bacon.
When we had computers exceed their programming to escape confined deathmatches and start rudimentarily investigating the exterior world.
When we decided that a 'multi-robot pursuit system' project that hunted down noncooperatives by detecting breath and heartbeat radio waves was a good idea.
I was there.
I saw. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darkman
Joined: 05 Mar 2007
Posts: 1454
Location: Someplace.... dark
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 6:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Sam wrote: | | Wow this is like a lawyerly-minded passenger on the titanic was musing about whether or not icebergs could be charged with polluting the atlantic with free-floating desk chairs left after a collision it doesn't matter don't you see it doesn't matter you're all dead they killed you they killed us all |
Not if John Conner has anything to say about it.
_________________
I couldnt think of anything smart to say. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DeD CHiKn
Joined: 04 Aug 2006
Posts: 9627
Location: Baltimore, Maryla*gunshot*
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Darkman wrote: | | Sam wrote: | | Wow this is like a lawyerly-minded passenger on the titanic was musing about whether or not icebergs could be charged with polluting the atlantic with free-floating desk chairs left after a collision it doesn't matter don't you see it doesn't matter you're all dead they killed you they killed us all |
Not if John Conner has anything to say about it. |
John Conner is so close to my real name its scary. Coupled with my unnatural hatred for robots and the impending robot apocalypse.
Im pretty sure, not positive, but pretty sure Im destined to be the savior of mankind.
_________________
I have a face, with a mustache.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
