10 ms·

Its been said before, but needs to be repeated every time: The implications of this line of R&D are horrific. Removing the risk of say, US soldier casualties,

Its been said before, but needs to be repeated every time: The implications of this line of R&D are horrific. Removing the risk of say, US soldier casualties, combined with media control, and with "merely" the current level of inhumanity of political leadership, would be a very ugly mix indeed. So yeah, its hard for me to get excited about the tech in this case.

abstractbill 16y ago
I know I probably should be worried about this kind of technology, but I just can't help it - I see this and I'm excited like a little kid again. I want one of these :)
melling 16y ago
Until we devise a system where consumer products, or government grants, drive more research like this, the military war machine is necessary for this type of funding. Most public company's with deep pockets live quarter to quarter. Gotta beat those earnings estimates, by a lot.
motters 16y ago
They're only horrific if they're misused. Robots like this will also have plenty of non-military applications - especially in agriculture. Legged locomotion opens up the possibility of cultivating land which was previously inaccessible to conventional farming automation. It should also be said that there is nothing inevitable about the close association between robotics and the military - it's just an artefact of American culture and the idiosyncratic way in which high tech research gets funded in America.
- StrawberryFrog 16y ago
  They're only horrific if they're misused. Given that this whole line of research is funded by the US military, what do you mean by "misused" ? Wouldn't "used" be more accurate?
  - motters 16y ago
    Under "misuse" I would include things like: Use of robots for the purpose of prosecuting a war crime Use of robots to carry out an act of terrorism Indiscriminate use of deadly force by autonomous robots Use of autonomous robots in a military context without proper supervision (for example, not being able to deactivate them once deployed).
- po 16y ago
  Perhaps you will change your mind after viewing this horrific weaponized version of BigDog: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptyV1cpE14o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptyV1cpE14o
bh23ha 16y ago
Unlike the A-bomb which is lovely. Or the decidedly low-tech genocide in Sudan. Or the genocides and crimes against humanity in all the other places. Bottom line is Homo homini lupus. It's not like the risk of US soldier casualties is that much of deterrent. Bombs, A-bombs, robots, not that different, the more things change, the more they stay the same.
- rimantas 16y ago
  So existence of A-bomb or low-tech genocide somehow justifies creation of new means to kill people?
  - puredemo 16y ago
    Sure. It'll be more transparent at least. And there might even be some due process eventually.
  - bh23ha 16y ago
    It doesn't justify anything. It just shows that we are already killing people in almost every way imaginable so another new one would not be anything all that new.
  - seldo 16y ago
    The same tech can also walk into a burning building to locate trapped people without endangering the lives of firemen, crawl through rubble to find survivors after an earthquake, power household robots to assist the disabled, and more. I know the source of funding here is distasteful, but this is a dual-use technology if ever I saw one.
  - GrandMasterBirt 16y ago
    This argument is moot. As long as humanity will want to kill eachother, everything will be used as weapons. Computers are used as weapons (hell would computerized bombs and missiles be possible otherwise?) boats are used to kill people. Airplanes used to kill people. So now robots, why not its the next step. Knowing the US government they will manufature them without any bit of encryption and with a radioshack remote control someone can hijack one of these :P
modeless 16y ago
Don't worry, we're much farther from that than you might think from this video. This robot can't see where it's going. It requires external cameras watching it from known fixed locations to figure out where it is. Not only that, but the cameras cannot look at a piece of terrain and figure out the 3D structure; the terrain must be mapped out in advance as a 3D mesh, down to the millimeter.
- Todd 16y ago
  Agreed. Computer vision is a steep challenge and will limit autonomy. The derivatives of these types of devices will likely be deployed as drones in the meantime.
CapitalistCartr 16y ago
We are rushing headlong into robotic automation. Civilian and military uses will abound. The day when hiding our head from technology was a solution is long past. Responsibility is the only option left that doesn't involve war. Our "leaders" will only be as insane as we allow them. People don't get the government they deserve; we get the one we'll tolerate.
HeyLaughingBoy 16y ago
I suspect that if you were rescued from a collapsed building by a descendant of this robot, you might possibly change your mind!

abstractbill 16y ago

I know I probably should be worried about this kind of technology, but I just can't help it - I see this and I'm excited like a little kid again. I want one of these :)

melling 16y ago

Until we devise a system where consumer products, or government grants, drive more research like this, the military war machine is necessary for this type of funding. Most public company's with deep pockets live quarter to quarter. Gotta beat those earnings estimates, by a lot.

motters 16y ago

They're only horrific if they're misused. Robots like this will also have plenty of non-military applications - especially in agriculture. Legged locomotion opens up the possibility of cultivating land which was previously inaccessible to conventional farming automation. It should also be said that there is nothing inevitable about the close association between robotics and the military - it's just an artefact of American culture and the idiosyncratic way in which high tech research gets funded in America.

StrawberryFrog 16y ago
They're only horrific if they're misused. Given that this whole line of research is funded by the US military, what do you mean by "misused" ? Wouldn't "used" be more accurate?
- motters 16y ago
  Under "misuse" I would include things like: Use of robots for the purpose of prosecuting a war crime Use of robots to carry out an act of terrorism Indiscriminate use of deadly force by autonomous robots Use of autonomous robots in a military context without proper supervision (for example, not being able to deactivate them once deployed).
po 16y ago
Perhaps you will change your mind after viewing this horrific weaponized version of BigDog: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptyV1cpE14o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptyV1cpE14o

bh23ha 16y ago

Unlike the A-bomb which is lovely. Or the decidedly low-tech genocide in Sudan. Or the genocides and crimes against humanity in all the other places. Bottom line is Homo homini lupus. It's not like the risk of US soldier casualties is that much of deterrent. Bombs, A-bombs, robots, not that different, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

rimantas 16y ago
So existence of A-bomb or low-tech genocide somehow justifies creation of new means to kill people?
- puredemo 16y ago
  Sure. It'll be more transparent at least. And there might even be some due process eventually.
- bh23ha 16y ago
  It doesn't justify anything. It just shows that we are already killing people in almost every way imaginable so another new one would not be anything all that new.
- seldo 16y ago
  The same tech can also walk into a burning building to locate trapped people without endangering the lives of firemen, crawl through rubble to find survivors after an earthquake, power household robots to assist the disabled, and more. I know the source of funding here is distasteful, but this is a dual-use technology if ever I saw one.
- GrandMasterBirt 16y ago
  This argument is moot. As long as humanity will want to kill eachother, everything will be used as weapons. Computers are used as weapons (hell would computerized bombs and missiles be possible otherwise?) boats are used to kill people. Airplanes used to kill people. So now robots, why not its the next step. Knowing the US government they will manufature them without any bit of encryption and with a radioshack remote control someone can hijack one of these :P

modeless 16y ago

Don't worry, we're much farther from that than you might think from this video. This robot can't see where it's going. It requires external cameras watching it from known fixed locations to figure out where it is. Not only that, but the cameras cannot look at a piece of terrain and figure out the 3D structure; the terrain must be mapped out in advance as a 3D mesh, down to the millimeter.

Todd 16y ago
Agreed. Computer vision is a steep challenge and will limit autonomy. The derivatives of these types of devices will likely be deployed as drones in the meantime.

CapitalistCartr 16y ago

We are rushing headlong into robotic automation. Civilian and military uses will abound. The day when hiding our head from technology was a solution is long past. Responsibility is the only option left that doesn't involve war. Our "leaders" will only be as insane as we allow them. People don't get the government they deserve; we get the one we'll tolerate.

HeyLaughingBoy 16y ago

I suspect that if you were rescued from a collapsed building by a descendant of this robot, you might possibly change your mind!