4 ms·
I wonder if one day in the distant future, humans will each have their own autonomous mutually assured destruction devices hovering around them at all times, al
by briefcomment 6y ago
I wonder if one day in the distant future, humans will each have their own autonomous mutually assured destruction devices hovering around them at all times, almost like a guardian angel.
It would even the playing field in some ways.
- blandflakes 6y agoYou might like Vernor Vinge's work. This is briefly touched on in "Marooned in Realtime", and I suspect a prior novel, "The Peace War" is similarly interesting.
- Robin_Message 6y agoThe "slap drone" of Iain M. Banks' culture performs a similar function in a different way: IIRC, convicted murders are allowed out, but followed forever by an autonomous drone that will stun (slap) them to prevent further crimes.
- adwn 6y agoYou're misremembering a detail: the term isn't "slap drone", but "drone slapped" – as in, you'll be slapped with an electronic ankle bracelet in drone form. That drone doesn't necessarily have to physically hurt or stun you to prevent you from doing something bad; even at the time when Player of Games (in which this concept is explained) is set, drones are powerful and sophisticated enough to displace or physically restrain someone with their field effectors. Also, if you murder someone, you won't be invited to parties anymore.
- Robin_Message 6y agoThank you! That sounds about right. Must put Player Of Games on the re-read pile. And yes, I remember not getting invited to parties is the ultimate sanction.
- nlitened 6y agoIsn’t the second amendment about exactly that?
- WJW 6y agoThe government has weapons that are literally thousands of times more destructive than anything you can wield under the second amendment. That's just apart from the fact that the vast majority of citizens cannot afford even a single fighter jet or cruise missile.
- frockington1 6y agoI'm all for citizens owning cruise missiles but, I think that's missing the point. The point is that an organized and armed population of say Vietnamese farmers could theoretically hold off against the largest power in the world until they decided to move on
- magicsmoke 6y agoSure, but after they move on you're left with nothing but your homes burnt down and your family dead, while they're still the largest economic and military power in the world living it up in their first-world mansions. Pyrrhic victories taste just like defeat.
- shiftpgdn 6y agoThe american airforce and navy are quite small (thousands of ships). A well placed strike force couple wipe the whole thing out. And then you're back to guys with rifles, unless you're going to start dropping nukes.
- Nasrudith 6y agoI suspect they would have limited usage - both from the legal concerns/lack of utility but also because the obvious counters would be even more readily available - outrange the thing. Assuming it is relatively precise instead of carrying a kilogram of antimatter or something absurd. The situation is 'very high information entropy' in the sense of it is a combination of both requiring both high technology proliferation and prosperity at the same time as severe and sustained instability for it to become remotely acceptable as a status quo instead of "National Guard? We need artillery on this maniac going around with a death drone. How the hell did he get it in the first place?" Theoretically a dual use guardian drone could say work for digging someone out of a collapsed building quickly which could also be lethal if misapplied but that is getting into 'keeping rattlesnake anti-venom in your pocket all times in Canada in case you get bit by one escaped from the zoo or potentially illegal exotic pet trade' levels in terms of effort and expense vs returns in safety.
- rusk 6y agoA boon for suicide bombers /s What happens if one goes off beside another one? Do you get a daisy chain effect?