Pentagon developing humanoid Terminator robots

  On 4/8/2013 at 10:27 PM, luke viia said:

Not to mention, if drones are trying to survey people and some of the civilians have a bit of electrical know-how, what will the govt do when people start making guerilla drones of their own to blow up surveillance machines? It wouldn't be hard, I imagine people will get pretty modular with these sorts of projects - a microcontroller that can track movement, something combustible to propel it and make it go bang on impact, and you're pretty close to a simple single-use counterattack drone.. We're gonna have a booming metal recycling industry, I can tell you that much

 

 

*has been sucked into the amazing world of speculative robotics*

yea

al queda with ardurino

watch the fuck out!

lol

My problem isn't the issue of autonomous machines. My problem is with the disreputable sources and wild speculation when there are real moral, philosophical, and technological questions we should pursue instead. Here's a book I highly recommend published by Oxford UP, in case anyone wants to pursue the more level-headed serious problems coming from this topic: http://www.amazon.com/Moral-Machines-Teaching-Robots-Right/dp/0199737975/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1365453842&sr=8-1&keywords=moral+machines+teaching+robots+right+from+wrong

I'm not saying that it's going to win a war, if you've read any of my posts on similar topics around here I've never advocated for a civilian uprising comparable to US military power, that's beyond unrealistic lol

I'm just saying it won't be hard to blow the things up, and no one will feel bad doing it, because it's a drone, not a cop. They will be spraypainted, vandalized, stolen, broken, salvaged, all sorts of stuff (and the penalties will probably be steep for doing it). Just an interesting speculation I guess, not trying to make a political statement here. Don't tell the feds but I'll probably pick up and salvage any surveillance drones I see lying around in the future. Taking free scrap is hard to resist.

  On 4/8/2013 at 10:44 PM, apriorion said:

My problem isn't the issue of autonomous machines. My problem is with the disreputable sources and wild speculation when there are real moral, philosophical, and technological questions we should pursue instead. Here's a book I highly recommend published by Oxford UP, in case anyone wants to pursue the more level-headed serious problems coming from this topic: http://www.amazon.com/Moral-Machines-Teaching-Robots-Right/dp/0199737975/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1365453842&sr=8-1&keywords=moral+machines+teaching+robots+right+from+wrong

Thanks for the recommendation, wasn't really sure where to turn for a better treatment of those topics!

  On 4/8/2013 at 10:45 PM, luke viia said:

I'm not saying that it's going to win a war, if you've read any of my posts on similar topics around here I've never advocated for a civilian uprising comparable to US military power, that's beyond unrealistic lol

 

I'm just saying it won't be hard to blow the things up, and no one will feel bad doing it, because it's a drone, not a cop. They will be spraypainted, vandalized, stolen, broken, salvaged, all sorts of stuff (and the penalties will probably be steep for doing it). Just an interesting speculation I guess, not trying to make a political statement here. Don't tell the feds but I'll probably pick up and salvage any surveillance drones I see lying around in the future. Taking free scrap is hard to resist.

i sincerely hope so.

the machine can only get so big and cumbersome before it gets bitten in the ass by it's own mosquitos.

sadly i see it as a misplaced use of resources to further "the agenda"

big oil/pharma and defense/aerospace companies run/ruin the planet and they are not about to let go of their iron grip anytime. soon.

  On 4/8/2013 at 10:46 PM, luke viia said:

Thanks for the recommendation, wasn't really sure where to turn for a better treatment of those topics!

My pleasure. It has a great bibliography, too, so you'll find lots of other great, reputable scholarly work on the subject in case you want to pursue it further.

  On 4/8/2013 at 10:51 PM, apriorion said:

 

  On 4/8/2013 at 10:46 PM, luke viia said:

Thanks for the recommendation, wasn't really sure where to turn for a better treatment of those topics!

 

My pleasure. It has a great bibliography, too, so you'll find lots of other great, reputable scholarly work on the subject in case you want to pursue it further.

"Taking a fast paced tour through the latest thinking about philosophical ethics and artificial intelligence, the authors argue that even if full moral agency for machines is a long way off, it is already necessary to start building a kind of functional morality, in which artificial moral agents have some basic ethical sensitivity. But the standard ethical theories don't seem adequate, and more socially engaged and engaging robots will be needed. As the authors show, the quest to build machines that are capable of telling right from wrong has begun."

which brings up a lot of questions-and the importance of the original programmer's intent and moral fabric.

If machines become not self aware but at a minimum able to mimic human thought patterns where will it end and who will be responsible?

Why ever use the term "defence" with these machines. They don't defend, they ruin. A want to see one of them build a bunker or deliver food.

  On 4/8/2013 at 10:57 PM, yikes said:

"Taking a fast paced tour through the latest thinking about philosophical ethics and artificial intelligence, the authors argue that even if full moral agency for machines is a long way off, it is already necessary to start building a kind of functional morality, in which artificial moral agents have some basic ethical sensitivity. But the standard ethical theories don't seem adequate, and more socially engaged and engaging robots will be needed. As the authors show, the quest to build machines that are capable of telling right from wrong has begun."

 

 

 

 

which brings up a lot of questions-and the importance of the original programmer's intent and moral fabric.

If machines become not self aware but at a minimum able to mimic human thought patterns where will it end and who will be responsible?

It's a good philosophical book. I don't agree with all of the authors' conclusions--in particular, I don't agree that they've successfully answered the moral equivalent of Searle's "Chinese Room" objection to Strong A.I. (the practical question in Chapter 4)--but each chapter has a core argument that's worth considering, and the book is full of real-life examples of machines that fit somewhere on the two-dimensional spectrum of moral agency (autonomy vs. ethical sensitivity).

boston dynamics is old news watch their YouTube channel to see how long they have been publishing these videos

Skynet is reality now. Just add Facebook and this:

the various robot vids on the tube showing off bots that colleges and/or other groups have made, showing off them working out the kinks with balancing etc are pretty freaky

you can see human/animal type movement in the legs, and watching them negotiate over obstacles and shit

its just mind blowing and you have to wonder how long it will actually be before we have something like a replicant or just various free-roaming types of robots as common fixtures in day to day urban life

  On 4/8/2013 at 11:15 PM, MisterE said:

the various robot vids on the tube showing off bots that colleges and/or other groups have made, showing off them working out the kinks with balancing etc are pretty freaky

 

you can see human/animal type movement in the legs, and watching them negotiate over obstacles and shit

 

its just mind blowing and you have to wonder how long it will actually be before we have something like a replicant or just various free-roaming types of robots as common fixtures in day to day urban life

no dude

you are crazy ,a troll and a troon dupe

wtf are you thinking?

just shut up and watch soccer and drink beer ok?

@ argus: holly fuck

OCTAGON ACTUALISING REPTILIAN ANNIHILATION DRONES

The main advice I have for people who encounter an unfriendly PETMAN is to cut the wires holding it up at the shoulders.

You are a scholar and a misanthrope, Yikes. Would you like a complementary tin foil hat?

lol

i'll take ten please

Come with Yikes if you want to live

yes

i'll save you!

and we'll continue to shave to stay civilized fellas....... everyday

full flick here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSGEiXO5894

They wouldn't develop an android to fight simply because it's an inefficient way of killing people. Robots are better at it if they're tiny little flying droids with lasers and shit. Small enough to fly into air vents, or to fly into a car window and self detonate.

  On 4/8/2013 at 10:11 PM, soundwave said:

 

Is this a mosquito?

No. It's an insect spy drone for urban areas, already in production, funded by the US Government. It can be remotely controlled and is equipped with a camera and a microphone. It can land on you, and it may have the potential to take a DNA sample or leave RFID tracking nanotechnology on your skin. It can fly through an open window, or it can attach to your clothing until you take it in your home.

governments around the world have our best interests in mind. move along, there is nothing to see here

  On 4/9/2013 at 6:00 AM, Redruth said:

 

  On 4/8/2013 at 10:11 PM, soundwave said:

 

 

Is this a mosquito?

No. It's an insect spy drone for urban areas, already in production, funded by the US Government. It can be remotely controlled and is equipped with a camera and a microphone. It can land on you, and it may have the potential to take a DNA sample or leave RFID tracking nanotechnology on your skin. It can fly through an open window, or it can attach to your clothing until you take it in your home.

governments around the world have our best interests in mind. move along, there is nothing to see here

This looks rendered

If a gub'ment robo-skeeter lands on your arm, just slap it.

There only this one image of it on the net nothing more. Not convinced

why would people think that petman was only developed to test hazmat suits ? weird.

  On 4/9/2013 at 6:00 AM, Redruth said:

 

  On 4/8/2013 at 10:11 PM, soundwave said:

 

Is this a mosquito?

No. It's an insect spy drone for urban areas, already in production, funded by the US Government. It can be remotely controlled and is equipped with a camera and a microphone. It can land on you, and it may have the potential to take a DNA sample or leave RFID tracking nanotechnology on your skin. It can fly through an open window, or it can attach to your clothing until you take it in your home.

 

governments around the world have our best interests in mind. move along, there is nothing to see here

I thought this was a CG mockup of an idea. Not a thing. The actual micro aerial vehicles look like a chip with wings.