Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   The UN would like to outlaw any robots in the T, ED or HAL series   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 65
    More: Asinine, a step away, military robots, IHS Jane  
•       •       •

3210 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Aug 2014 at 2:13 PM (44 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



65 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-08-28 01:44:18 PM  
"Any weapon of war is terrible, and if you can launch this without human intervention, I think it's even worse. It compounds the problem and dehumanises it in a way."

In a way?  Yes, non-human intervention is, by definition, dehumanizing.

Just think about these self-driving cars that we hear are being tested on the roads. So that is only just a small step to develop weapons that are going to be activated without human intervention

Of all the technologies being developed that might lead to "robotic warfare", it's self-driving cars that have her worried?
 
2014-08-28 02:15:40 PM  

timujin: Of all the technologies being developed that might lead to "robotic warfare", it's self-driving cars that have her worried?


As they should.  Self driving vehicles need to be able to know where they are, have localized sensors for detecting and selecting obstacles, manoeuvre around obstacles, travel over varying terrain, to be able to adapt to changing environment, to identify dangers, and so on.  Short of attaching a gun to them and giving orders to shoot at a specific target, a self-driving vehicle is pretty much the ideal AI platform for navigation and target acquisition.
 
2014-08-28 02:17:27 PM  

timujin: Of all the technologies being developed that might lead to "robotic warfare", it's self-driving cars that have her worried?


I'm most worried about the comment made by a guy that built model radio-controlled tanks. "Electronics have a tendency to keep doing whatever they were told last. That's why I don't build auto-loaders anymore."
 
2014-08-28 02:18:23 PM  
Wrong tag subby.
 
2014-08-28 02:18:43 PM  
Angela KANE? Nice try, NOD agent. We'll not have you hamstringing global defense forces for the upcoming tiberian war.
 
2014-08-28 02:19:26 PM  
How long do we have to comply?
 
2014-08-28 02:20:03 PM  

timujin: "Any weapon of war is terrible, and if you can launch this without human intervention, I think it's even worse. It compounds the problem and dehumanises it in a way."

In a way?  Yes, non-human intervention is, by definition, dehumanizing.

Just think about these self-driving cars that we hear are being tested on the roads. So that is only just a small step to develop weapons that are going to be activated without human intervention

Of all the technologies being developed that might lead to "robotic warfare", it's self-driving cars that have her worried?


She should just stay hone, watch TV, play Klondike and make sammiches. Much safer.
 
2014-08-28 02:20:32 PM  
But Screamers and Claws are still OK?  Right?
 
2014-08-28 02:20:42 PM  
It might be nice if we added a section to Geneva about autonomous robots (they can do anything but "decide" on their own to open fire, even when taking fire), but having the UN do this is asking for it to be included with AGENDA 21 SHARIAH COMMON CORE VACCINAUTISM GOVERNMENT CONTROL BOOGA BOOGA

Ahem. And no one wins when that happens.

// could the current US Senate even ratify such a treaty (assuming it was simply that one provision)?
 
2014-08-28 02:21:25 PM  
The only people opposed are the ones that can't build them before us. Catch up or fall behind.
 
2014-08-28 02:22:36 PM  

MBooda: How long do we have to comply?


It's the UN.  You have until the end of the next decade to think about considering forming a committee to explore the possibility of complying.


(yes I know it was a movie reference)
 
2014-08-28 02:22:40 PM  
Time to review my Old Glory policy
 
2014-08-28 02:25:31 PM  

unyon: timujin: Of all the technologies being developed that might lead to "robotic warfare", it's self-driving cars that have her worried?

As they should.  Self driving vehicles need to be able to know where they are, have localized sensors for detecting and selecting obstacles, manoeuvre around obstacles, travel over varying terrain, to be able to adapt to changing environment, to identify dangers, and so on.  Short of attaching a gun to them and giving orders to shoot at a specific target, a self-driving vehicle is pretty much the ideal AI platform for navigation and target acquisition.


Sure, but my point is that governments are directly researching robots for those specific tasks, robots designed for the battlefield, whether on the ground or in the air.  Self driving cars are benefiting from this research, not driving it (pun intended).
 
2014-08-28 02:26:09 PM  
They may want to consider adding 'Nestor' to the list.
 
2014-08-28 02:27:17 PM  
#5 is alive?
 
2014-08-28 02:27:56 PM  
The HAL series of computers, used more discrete components, with slower processors,  that had a tendency to fail in a gravity free space environment.
 
2014-08-28 02:29:44 PM  
 
2014-08-28 02:29:56 PM  
Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man's mind.

/I have seen it, presciently.
 
2014-08-28 02:33:10 PM  
Daisy, Daisy give me your answer do. I'm half crazy all for the love of you.
 
2014-08-28 02:35:04 PM  
Doesn't matter. Once someone starts using them then everyone will. They'll give too much advantage.

The real reason that there's a push at the UN to outlaw them is that they realize poorer countries won't be able to afford them. What robotic warfare is going to do is cement the military superiority of rich nations even further. Outlawing robotic weapons is a move aimed specifically at limiting US military power.
 
2014-08-28 02:36:37 PM  

MBooda: How long do we have to comply?


Twenty seconds.
 
2014-08-28 02:36:50 PM  

The Irresponsible Captain: Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man's mind.


Depends on which man's mind one is referring to.  In some cases, such machines already exist:

media.giphy.com
 
2014-08-28 02:38:08 PM  

Pick: The HAL series of computers, used more discrete components, with slower processors,   that had a tendency to fail in a gravity free space environment.


Only when programmed improperly. HAL functioned exactly the way he was designed to.
 
2014-08-28 02:40:26 PM  
Ray Bradbury or Issac Asimov...paging Ray Bradbury or Issac Asimov to the white courtesy phone please...
 
2014-08-28 02:41:07 PM  
hollywoodhatesme.files.wordpress.com

also, let me know when the battlefield robots progress to this. I'll enlist to fight along side them.
 
2014-08-28 02:41:41 PM  
images.nymag.com
 
2014-08-28 02:43:16 PM  

alitaki: Pick: The HAL series of computers, used more discrete components, with slower processors,   that had a tendency to fail in a gravity free space environment.

Only when programmed improperly. HAL functioned exactly the way he was designed to.


Rumor has it HAL was named HAL to be one step ahead of IBM.
 
2014-08-28 02:43:45 PM  
Wait... Can robots be accused of racism?
 
2014-08-28 02:48:12 PM  
Is this like how Germany was banned from building an army before ww2 or like how japan is banned from having an army or navy, specifically aircraft carriers so now it has a civil defense force and the worlds largest helicopter destroyer "carrier"?

Seems to work well.
 
2014-08-28 02:49:37 PM  

HAMMERTOE: Wait... Can robots be accused of racism?


Is "Canadian" a race?

i.ytimg.com
 
2014-08-28 02:50:01 PM  

HAMMERTOE: Wait... Can robots be accused of racism?


If they're programmed to shoot only turban-wearing brown people they can. Wouldn;t want to program them to shoot only brown people 'cause a large part of US fighting forces consist of persons who are not what is considered "white.' NTTAWWT.
 
2014-08-28 02:50:08 PM  

To The Escape Zeppelin!: What robotic warfare is going to do is cement the military superiority of rich nations even further.


The same way heavy artillery did. The same way dynamite* did. The same way U-boats did. The same way flight, then supersonic flight, then high-altitude flight, then trans-oceanic flight did (or whatever order in which they were developed). The same way nukes and nuke tech did (actually, since we've radically restricted who can even build NONmilitary nuke facilities, that one's accurate). The same way body armor has. The same way circuitry has. The same way telecommunications has.

Point being, such an advantage is usually short-lived. With the exception of nuke tech, which is different due to the relative scarcity of military-grade uranium floating around, those advantages disappear the moment after they appear. And actually, since the whole point of giving Russia the bomb was to allay their fears of Western domination and Pakistan was given the bomb because India (Great Britain) had it, sometimes the world goes to great lengths to remove those advantages where they would otherwise be entrenched.

Of course, today's UN is not the UN of 1950, or even of 1970.

*"[O]n the day that two army corps can mutually annihilate each other in a second, all civilised nations will surely recoil with horror and disband their troops." -Alfred Nobel, inventor of dynamite
 
2014-08-28 02:50:08 PM  

HAMMERTOE: Wait... Can robots be accused of racism?


wpc.556e.edgecastcdn.net
 
2014-08-28 02:55:46 PM  

The_Original_Roxtar: [images.nymag.com image 292x462]


FFFT. Lousy reference. Try this (ball bearing) on for size:

www.ijdeevo.com

2.bp.blogspot.com

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-08-28 02:57:43 PM  
What if they made a second variety of killbots?
 
2014-08-28 02:58:52 PM  
www.proprofs.com
i465.photobucket.com
 
2014-08-28 02:59:23 PM  
Oh, look, you have made it into this thread with very little drool on your keyboard. How exciting for you. If you are here to ban killer robots, please show your support by lining up against that wall. A census-bot will be along shortly to take your vote. Each vote will be registered with a loud bang. You should try to enjoy these last moments with your friends. HaHa. I am joking. You have no friends.
upload.wikimedia.org
 
2014-08-28 03:02:00 PM  

Dr Dreidel: *"[O]n the day that two army corps can mutually annihilate each other in a second, all civilised nations will surely recoil with horror and disband their troops." -Alfred Nobel, inventor of dynamite


He wasn't really wrong -- he just underestimated the amount of destruction that would be required to induce that level of fear.  After the development of nuclear weapons, no two nuclear-armed countries have fought a major war against each other, and the numbers of nukes held in stockpiles drop year-by-year.
 
2014-08-28 03:04:52 PM  

unyon: timujin: Of all the technologies being developed that might lead to "robotic warfare", it's self-driving cars that have her worried?

As they should.  Self driving vehicles need to be able to know where they are, have localized sensors for detecting and selecting obstacles, manoeuvre around obstacles, travel over varying terrain, to be able to adapt to changing environment, to identify dangers, and so on.  Short of attaching a gun to them and giving orders to shoot at a specific target, a self-driving vehicle is pretty much the ideal AI platform for navigation and target acquisition.


And the South Koreans already have that covered with turrets.  Put a Korean autoturret onto a self-driving car and you've got your Ogre Mark 0.

Won't somebody think of the poor GEVs?
 
2014-08-28 03:06:23 PM  
I see that we're about 16,000 years ahead of schedule for banning thinking machines.
 
2014-08-28 03:07:08 PM  

ciberido: And the South Koreans already have that covered with turrets.


www.freakygaming.com
 
2014-08-28 03:08:23 PM  

The Irresponsible Captain: Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man's mind.


I wasn't expecting a sort of Butlerian Jihad!
 
2014-08-28 03:09:28 PM  

Dr Dreidel: And actually, since the whole point of giving Russia the bomb was to allay their fears of Western domination and Pakistan was given the bomb because India (Great Britain) had it,


img2.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-08-28 03:10:06 PM  
dl.dropboxusercontent.com

That ship sailed long ago.
...and not a damn thing's wrong about it.
 
2014-08-28 03:11:02 PM  

Pffft- out of my cold dea-


i57.tinypic.com

 
2014-08-28 03:17:25 PM  

HAMMERTOE: Wait... Can robots be accused of racism?


Already happened.
 
2014-08-28 03:19:52 PM  

MBooda: The Irresponsible Captain: Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man's mind.

I wasn't expecting a sort of Butlerian Jihad!


I'd say more, but I have to fold space to Ix in 26 minutes.  Many machines on Ix.
 
2014-08-28 03:25:41 PM  
lolwut?


image-cdn.zap2it.com
 
2014-08-28 03:27:39 PM  

iron de havilland: Dr Dreidel: And actually, since the whole point of giving Russia the bomb was to allay their fears of Western domination and Pakistan was given the bomb because India (Great Britain) had it,

[img2.wikia.nocookie.net image 225x225]


Wikipedia is your friend: "[Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali] Bhutto was "obsessed" with India's nuclear program, and that is why Bhutto immediately came up with the idea of obtaining nuclear weapons to prevent Pakistan from signing another 'Treaty of Versailles' as it did in 1971 [after the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971].

In 1969, after a long negotiation, the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority (UKAEA) signed a formal agreement to supply Pakistan with a nuclear fuel reprocessing plant capable of extracting 360 g of weapons-grade plutonium annually."
 
2014-08-28 03:43:46 PM  
See: Samsung SGR-A1 Sentry Robot. Available now, $200k each.
 
Displayed 50 of 65 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report