5 ms·

After WWI, the mass horror caused by certain types of weapons like chemical weapons were enough to get all powerful countries to agree we didn't want to see the

After WWI, the mass horror caused by certain types of weapons like chemical weapons were enough to get all powerful countries to agree we didn't want to see them on the planet. Hopefully we'll have a chance to recover from the new horrors we are creating too. Whether you have the capability to make them or not, either the US, Russia, both, or someone else will be HAPPY to sell you a bunch. Which is another reason those with the capability to make them want to keep it, to make the money, maybe even a more significant reason. And countries that _don't_ have the resources to pay for F-35s or air craft carrieres have possibly more to 'gain' here. Killer robots will be a great equalizer in the ability to create a nightmare hellscape, making it accessible on a much cheaper budget.

throw_nbvc1234 5y ago
I'm sure the US and Russia will include backdoors into all of the drones they sell which will changes these dynamics a bit. Probably more likely to have proxy wars then rogue wars.
- inawarminister 5y ago
  The rest of the world, like Ethiopians and Ukrainians have been doing, would just buy from more... Understanding actors like Turkey instead.
PontifexMinimus 5y ago
> Killer robots will be a great equalizer in the ability to create a nightmare hellscape I imagine most people here have already seen the Slaughterbots video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA A more conventional type of attack would be using large numbers cheap cruise missiles. If you can make them for $20k each then $1bn would buy you 50,000 of them, which is probably a good deal more than the number of anti-aircraft missiles your adversary has, and certainly a lot more than their number of fighter aircraft. Therefore firing off a lot in one go would overload their defences and many would get through. If aimed at infrastructure target, they could cripple a country's economy, and how soon after that do people start starving?
- jrochkind1 5y ago
  I hadn't seen that video, thanks for pointing it out. Eh, the rest of the world would probably gang up on you at that point, it'd be pretty suicidal. I think a more likely scenario is killer robots are making the places that state and non-state actors already "get away" with turning into nightmares just that much more nightmarish, and that many more of them. Whether it's the USA in Afghanistan or what goes on in Sudan or Somalia. More and more places like that, which will be more and more nightmarish. Would the USA even have to "give up" on Afghanistan with that tech doing what the drones alone couldn't? But now also the smaller-budget actors like Somalian warlords get their go at it. It's gonna be great.
- runnerup 5y ago
  I believe "slaughterbots" may be able to better evade certain types of air defense (e.g. CIWS), in exchange for maybe being more susceptible to other types of air defense (EMP?). Additionally, hypothetical slaughterbots would have much lower civilian casualties.
  - varelse 5y ago
    You just put up chicken wire and the slaughterbots get stuck. Most of these weapons have very low tech countermeasures. Where they're effective is when they're not expected. That might work once. https://spectrum.ieee.org/why-you-shouldnt-fear-slaughterbots https://spectrum.ieee.org/why-you-shouldnt-fear-slaughterbot...
    - runnerup 5y ago
      Maybe. The 'slaughterbots' of the future as depicted use explosives to blow holes in buildings. I'd imagine they could arrange multiple in a circle to blow an arbitrarily large hole in fencing or netting. Also, usually chicken-wire fences just go around what's being protected, not necessarily over it (except for small farm animal enclosures, like actual chicken coops). It's hard for me to imagine entire buildings / neighborhoods / cities with chicken wire covering over the tops of the buildings in a way that couldn't be quickly breached with explosives. Or drones could unroll detcord in a circle against the fence as well.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>After WWI, the mass horror caused by certain types of weapons like chemical weapons were enough to get all powerful countries to agree we didn't want to see them on the planet. They were banned because nobody liked them and they weren't tactically useful. If they were useful they wouldn't have been "banned".
User23 5y ago
Let's not forget the UK, which is number two[1] for arms exports. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_arms_export https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_arms_export
tuatoru 5y ago
> After WWI, the mass horror caused by certain types of weapons like chemical weapons were enough to get all powerful countries to agree we didn't want to see them on the planet. Yeah. Kind of. Officially. In primary school books. Chemical weapons (and biological weapons) don't work¹, in addition to producing horrific images and stories. It was easy to ban them for this combination of reasons. Killer robots? We don't know yet, but they have the potential of working excellently well. (Although it depends on various reliabilities, the logistics chain required, activation time, percent deployable time, and failure modes. Probably among other things.) If they work, it will be hard to get them banned. The measure of their effectiveness will be their ability to neutralise the enemy's military capability without destroying economic infrastructure (which you will want to take over and use for yourself. If you don't, there are nuclear weapons for that). 1. https://acoup.blog/2020/03/20/collections-why-dont-we-use-chemical-weapons-anymore/ https://acoup.blog/2020/03/20/collections-why-dont-we-use-ch...

throw_nbvc1234 5y ago

I'm sure the US and Russia will include backdoors into all of the drones they sell which will changes these dynamics a bit. Probably more likely to have proxy wars then rogue wars.

inawarminister 5y ago
The rest of the world, like Ethiopians and Ukrainians have been doing, would just buy from more... Understanding actors like Turkey instead.

PontifexMinimus 5y ago

> Killer robots will be a great equalizer in the ability to create a nightmare hellscape I imagine most people here have already seen the Slaughterbots video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA A more conventional type of attack would be using large numbers cheap cruise missiles. If you can make them for $20k each then $1bn would buy you 50,000 of them, which is probably a good deal more than the number of anti-aircraft missiles your adversary has, and certainly a lot more than their number of fighter aircraft. Therefore firing off a lot in one go would overload their defences and many would get through. If aimed at infrastructure target, they could cripple a country's economy, and how soon after that do people start starving?

jrochkind1 5y ago
I hadn't seen that video, thanks for pointing it out. Eh, the rest of the world would probably gang up on you at that point, it'd be pretty suicidal. I think a more likely scenario is killer robots are making the places that state and non-state actors already "get away" with turning into nightmares just that much more nightmarish, and that many more of them. Whether it's the USA in Afghanistan or what goes on in Sudan or Somalia. More and more places like that, which will be more and more nightmarish. Would the USA even have to "give up" on Afghanistan with that tech doing what the drones alone couldn't? But now also the smaller-budget actors like Somalian warlords get their go at it. It's gonna be great.
runnerup 5y ago
I believe "slaughterbots" may be able to better evade certain types of air defense (e.g. CIWS), in exchange for maybe being more susceptible to other types of air defense (EMP?). Additionally, hypothetical slaughterbots would have much lower civilian casualties.
- varelse 5y ago
  You just put up chicken wire and the slaughterbots get stuck. Most of these weapons have very low tech countermeasures. Where they're effective is when they're not expected. That might work once. https://spectrum.ieee.org/why-you-shouldnt-fear-slaughterbots https://spectrum.ieee.org/why-you-shouldnt-fear-slaughterbot...
  - runnerup 5y ago
    Maybe. The 'slaughterbots' of the future as depicted use explosives to blow holes in buildings. I'd imagine they could arrange multiple in a circle to blow an arbitrarily large hole in fencing or netting. Also, usually chicken-wire fences just go around what's being protected, not necessarily over it (except for small farm animal enclosures, like actual chicken coops). It's hard for me to imagine entire buildings / neighborhoods / cities with chicken wire covering over the tops of the buildings in a way that couldn't be quickly breached with explosives. Or drones could unroll detcord in a circle against the fence as well.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

>After WWI, the mass horror caused by certain types of weapons like chemical weapons were enough to get all powerful countries to agree we didn't want to see them on the planet. They were banned because nobody liked them and they weren't tactically useful. If they were useful they wouldn't have been "banned".

User23 5y ago

Let's not forget the UK, which is number two[1] for arms exports. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_arms_export https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_arms_export

tuatoru 5y ago

> After WWI, the mass horror caused by certain types of weapons like chemical weapons were enough to get all powerful countries to agree we didn't want to see them on the planet. Yeah. Kind of. Officially. In primary school books. Chemical weapons (and biological weapons) don't work¹, in addition to producing horrific images and stories. It was easy to ban them for this combination of reasons. Killer robots? We don't know yet, but they have the potential of working excellently well. (Although it depends on various reliabilities, the logistics chain required, activation time, percent deployable time, and failure modes. Probably among other things.) If they work, it will be hard to get them banned. The measure of their effectiveness will be their ability to neutralise the enemy's military capability without destroying economic infrastructure (which you will want to take over and use for yourself. If you don't, there are nuclear weapons for that). 1. https://acoup.blog/2020/03/20/collections-why-dont-we-use-chemical-weapons-anymore/ https://acoup.blog/2020/03/20/collections-why-dont-we-use-ch...