posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 10:11 AM
a reply to: darkstar57
The result is not pedictable.....there is simply no effort to discuss the truth....and the truth is that AI handsdown loses consistantly to human
tactical read and reacting and pro-active planning.
The fact that AI can ignore the g-forces and performance envelope parameters which hinder flying humans means zero in the winning equation.......the
perfomance envelopes of the materials involved will always be the defining teminal factor .....weapons designs and projections can produce superior
consistantly terminal performance curves which figuratively "own the skies".
A Fokker Triplane properly outfitted to project pulsed EMP fields would walk all over any of todays major militaries.
Big Blue never "beat" Kasparov.....Big Blues design team CHEATED.....they had to break peformance envelope parameter protocals.....so they CHEATED to
techniclly beat Kasparov...you arent cheating anything in an engagement.
As with anything its the brains behind the designers which make "intelligent weapons" that define winning and losing.A plane is a delivery
platform...a Pilot is a management platform.....the WEAPONS PLATFORM ALWAYS DEFINES AND DECIDES THE WINNER OF THE MOMENT.
You can use AI to "mirror" human pilot decision making in an anticipatory manner via numericlly defined algorithims....but this is a very limited
application....yes I agree right now AI seems to be wiping up the field of engagement .....but no one has challenged the ________ Military under
circumstantial dynamics which would allow them to display the methodology needed to consistantly defeat AI in tactical dynamic engagement.If one can
conceptualise the cross-over value of specific protocals then one cans see how with small adaptations on-the-fly the _________ have a process which is
an AI killer by proxy.They just might not be aware of the potentials they posses.
IMHO ....they had to teach Big Blue how to TACTICLLY BREAK PROTOCAL to match a PROFILE they built of one SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL.......so they "profiled"
Kasparov then they re-programmed their compuetrs to cheat when and where their "profiles" defined....so you see.....what goes in is what comes out
with ALL FORMS OF AI....without the "profile"......which was IN NO WAY CATALYSED BY NOR MANIFESTED OR MANAGED BY the AI....well Kasparov wins every
time hands down and only gets better as he learns.With terminal rules of engagement there are no rules.