Off Topic => General Off Topic => Topic started by: Rumblood on October 05, 2013, 01:45:36 am
Title: Killer robot
Post by: Rumblood on October 05, 2013, 01:45:36 am
Well not really, not yet. But this is going to put the terror into the terrorist once they put dog jaws and cat claws on these things, armor them up and send them into urban areas to clear out the place.
hope they are already working on it. saves lifes of poor soldiers when used right
Or kills them.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: no_rules_just_play on October 05, 2013, 03:38:52 pm
I guess the finnished robot will make less noise? Wouldn't want to be walking through enemy terrain with this thing next to me. They can hear you coming from miles away and you don't hear shit :/
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Christo on October 05, 2013, 03:40:35 pm
Reminds me of Drone technology.
Those damn things use prop engines and are SO DAMN LOUD.
Jesus.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Prpavi on October 05, 2013, 03:42:43 pm
Future warfare is no longer future
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Christo on October 05, 2013, 03:44:05 pm
Ah yes sry they are making a mechanical cheetah to help ppl, stupid me, it will be just a coincidence when a Gatling pops up on it's back few years form now, self defense ya know :wink:
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Butan on October 05, 2013, 03:56:07 pm
Makes me think we arent so far from a MGS4 world where robots replaces armoured tanks in combined arms tactics, with infantry remaining there (with possible cybernetic improvements) for anti-infantry and anti-armour support.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Daunt_Flockula on October 05, 2013, 07:02:59 pm
Cool stuff. I wonder how far its built-in battery could get it though.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Clockworkkiller on October 05, 2013, 07:04:15 pm
can i keep one as a pet that doesnt need feeding?
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Daunt_Flockula on October 05, 2013, 07:06:42 pm
Battery? Doesn't the noise mean it has an internal combustion engine?
Well if we ever get off our asses and mine enough helium 3 to make it cheap and plentiful enough for the researchers who are working on the fusion reactor the size of a basketball without all the nasty radiation and very little waste to finish their work, these things will be quiet enough that breathing heavy may be louder. The U.S. skipping the moon, ceding it to China and Japan, and going on to asteroids and Mars instead will go down as one of the biggest economic boondoggles of the past few centuries. Our oil companies have the revenue to fund an endeavor themselves, but are so near sighted and shareholder beholden that they are too stupid to look to future goals and revenues. And it isn't just them. Apple is expected to cross $170 billion in cash reserves this year. The cost for a manned mission to the moon and back again? Less than $1 billion and with a real effort, the cost could come down significantly. The thing is, you don't even have to do a bunch of flying back and forth. Set up an unmanned mining operation that gathers raw material, puts them into containers, strap them onto a rail and accelerate them off the moon and into the Pacific ocean for pickup and processing on Earth. You only need to send someone there for container resupply and maintenance, and it is likely that the containers themselves could be manufactured on the moon itself.
But I digress....killer robots are coming soon to planet Earth!
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Kalam on October 06, 2013, 12:24:34 am
Those damn things use prop engines and are SO DAMN LOUD.
Jesus.
The drones over here are silent. Sometimes they follow me when I'm driving to work, and I don't notice them until I look up.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: EponiCo on October 06, 2013, 01:23:28 am
How much does it cost? How much would it cost in a fully armed and functional version? How much does a molotov coctail that can damage all its electronics beyond repair cost? Not saying this isn't cool, but I don't think in a war it's terribly useful (*). Perhaps if you are really sparing no expense to keep your own soldiers alive. If the enemy has an actual chance to win the war this would be pretty stupid, though. But then occupying terrorist with blowing up some 100k robots every now and then might still be better than leaving them the time to blow up targets in your own country.
(*) For special applications it maybe is, but not as a replacement for soldiers.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Butan on October 06, 2013, 02:02:20 am
Well if we ever get off our asses and mine enough helium 3 to make it cheap and plentiful enough for the researchers who are working on the fusion reactor the size of a basketball without all the nasty radiation and very little waste to finish their work, these things will be quiet enough that breathing heavy may be louder. [...] But I digress....killer robots are coming soon to planet Earth!
Rumblood for president!
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Torben on October 06, 2013, 02:17:54 am
iron man vs terminator, cant wait.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Rumblood on October 06, 2013, 04:00:35 am
How much does it cost? How much would it cost in a fully armed and functional version? How much does a molotov coctail that can damage all its electronics beyond repair cost? Not saying this isn't cool, but I don't think in a war it's terribly useful (*). Perhaps if you are really sparing no expense to keep your own soldiers alive. If the enemy has an actual chance to win the war this would be pretty stupid, though. But then occupying terrorist with blowing up some 100k robots every now and then might still be better than leaving them the time to blow up targets in your own country.
(*) For special applications it maybe is, but not as a replacement for soldiers.
The IBM 650 computer from the 1950's would cost you $4 million in today's dollars, and yet here you are sending us messages on a PC today @ 1/8000th's of the cost and suffice to say what you have is millions or billions of times faster and has a similar increase in memory (I cant be arsed to do the math) As for hardening the equipment against attack, it will increase the cost, but isn't a technical challenge. Before I kick off to the next world, we will have Congress dealing with legislation that deals with the use of these in the streets for law enforcement and whether or not AI will be allowed limited autonomous functions.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Christo on October 06, 2013, 06:06:52 am
The drones over here are silent. Sometimes they follow me when I'm driving to work, and I don't notice them until I look up.
Yeah but maybe these are louder because they can carry payloads like rocket pods mounted under their wings, and that's they use prop engines? No idea
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Kafein on October 06, 2013, 01:49:57 pm
Back on topic, why on earth would one want to have a 4 legged robot instead of you know, wheels ? Push this thing out of balance and voila, terminator vanquished.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Xant on October 06, 2013, 01:54:12 pm
This is causing way more discussion than it warrants. The only thing it's close to being capable of doing is the most elementary going from A to B tasks.
As for "killer robot" applications of this... they are as far away as they've always been. Building a robot that moves (badly) is the very easiest part.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: zagibu on October 06, 2013, 01:56:49 pm
Killer applications already become possible with movement. Just strap a bomb to it, or a canister of some toxic gas. Beware the robotic plague dogs.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Xant on October 06, 2013, 02:00:01 pm
Yes, but that's not what people are so excited/worried about. Strapping a bomb to something that can move has already been possible for.. as long as bombs have existed.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Kafein on October 06, 2013, 02:01:03 pm
I don't really believe in a wide application of armed ground drones in the near future. Air and sea navigation is ridiculously much easier from and AI point of view. Even getting 4 legged movement right is an incredible feat, and it can't even turn well yet.
Building a robot that moves (badly) is the very easiest part.
I really don't think so. Image recognition is quite easy, and from there target acquisition shouldn't be a big problem. The problem almost reduces to what you can mount on your moving platform.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Xant on October 06, 2013, 02:10:29 pm
I really don't think so. Image recognition is quite easy, and from there target acquisition shouldn't be a big problem. The problem almost reduces to what you can mount on your moving platform.
I'm talking about moving in a straight line, which really isn't all that difficult. Target acquisition and image recognition clearly aren't that easy, seeing as modern tanks still have gunners instead of being computer-controlled.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Kafein on October 06, 2013, 04:15:18 pm
I'm talking about moving in a straight line, which really isn't all that difficult.
Moving a creature with n legs forward on flat terrain is far from trivial. From that to actual military applications on any terrain the leap is huge. Even automated cars through a desert is incredibly difficult (but some made it).
Target acquisition and image recognition clearly aren't that easy, seeing as modern tanks still have gunners instead of being computer-controlled.
Computers are better at spotting movement but worse at understanding orders and identifying hostiles from other humans. We are also uncomfortable with the idea of letting a robot decide to kill things.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: EponiCo on October 06, 2013, 04:45:17 pm
The IBM 650 computer from the 1950's would cost you $4 million in today's dollars, and yet here you are sending us messages on a PC today @ 1/8000th's of the cost and suffice to say what you have is millions or billions of times faster and has a similar increase in memory (I cant be arsed to do the math) As for hardening the equipment against attack, it will increase the cost, but isn't a technical challenge.
True, but that took 50 years. And cars on the other hand didn't become much cheaper. It will not be terribly difficult to disable one with an rpg or something I imagine. Even when you strap on all armor it can possibly carry. So what do you have in the end? Something that's somewhat tougher and with more firepower than an ordinary soldier but which can't go up stairs or might even have problems sorting out its legs when you throw a blanket over it. All in all it's not terribly scary, not compared to the all the other things that long exist.
As for decreasing costs I'd think what will become really cheap in the future is human life. Why are modern computers so cheap (*)? If you think the robots will become quite cheap, do you think they will be made in China? I am not at all against technology or globalization. But I do not think the technological revolution we had was economically sound (the costs were hidden though). We are only beginning to realize that now. And the other question is, instead of building killer robots why not go for fully autonomous agriculture, textiles and stuff and send all the new unemployed to the frontlines with a cheap rifle?
(*) One part of it certainly accounts for the initial investments being covered. Which is why noone cares about space mining. Even if establishing the necessary infrastructure only costs 50 billion $ and there's no extra running costs, you are not competing with companies digging it out of the earth and paying exactly 0 $ for such things. The other part invariably comes down to people producing more for a lower wage if you recurse long enough.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: [ptx] on October 06, 2013, 05:04:21 pm
I don't really believe in a wide application of armed ground drones in the near future. Air and sea navigation is ridiculously much easier from and AI point of view. Even getting 4 legged movement right is an incredible feat, and it can't even turn well yet.
I really don't think so. Image recognition is quite easy, and from there target acquisition shouldn't be a big problem. The problem almost reduces to what you can mount on your moving platform.
Image recognition is quite easy if you don't mind false positives.
Target acquisition in a dynamically shifting environment under far from perfect conditions... nah, we're not there yet.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: Kafein on October 06, 2013, 07:57:43 pm
Back on topic, why on earth would one want to have a 4 legged robot instead of you know, wheels ? Push this thing out of balance and voila, terminator vanquished.
Because a 4 legged animal can go where wheels cannot. It can already recover from stumbles and falls easily (or so BD claims and the video shows one such recovery where it tumbles and returns to its knees). It is in early development, but already is quite far along.
Moving a creature with n legs forward on flat terrain is far from trivial. From that to actual military applications on any terrain the leap is huge. Even automated cars through a desert is incredibly difficult (but some made it).
Not nearly as difficult as you think. A guy built one of these in his garage.
Title: Re: Killer robot
Post by: F i n on October 06, 2013, 10:41:13 pm