3 ms·
If the military can use this technology cost-effectively, they will use it. While the "Campaign to Stop Killer Robots" is amusing, I doubt it will have any effe
by rza 13y ago
If the military can use this technology cost-effectively, they will use it. While the "Campaign to Stop Killer Robots" is amusing, I doubt it will have any effect whatsoever. It's reminiscent of Pope Innocent II trying to ban the use of crossbows against fellow medieval Christians, yet here we are, two World Wars later.
- sien 13y agoTo be fair, crossbows were not used in either World War so the papal edict can be seen as somewhat successful.
- lanoitan 13y agoThe sauterelle(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sauterelle http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sauterelle) was a kind of crossbow.
- ckozlowski 13y agoIt's already being used far more cost effectively with the MQ-9 Reaper. This is getting attention because the F-16 is in the current inventory. But these aren't the Block 50/52s of today. They're the original versions, rolled off the line in the 80s. It's like an early BMW M3. Yes, it's an M3, but it'll get smoked by a 328 of today. The worries of NGOs in this case are misplaced. Old target drone F-16s don't have the sensors or electronics to drop the current required ordinance, and the cost of refitting them isn't worth the expense when there are purpose-built platforms that can do this much more cost effectively.
- unclebucknasty 13y agoI think it's the optics that have NGOs concerned. A full-sized RC fighter jet is worrisome to anyone who already has concerns about where we're headed in this killer drone era. Looks like an escalation, irrespective of whether it actually is technologically speaking.