It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The AI 'Top Gun' that can beat the military's best:

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2016 @ 06:20 PM
link   
Well, Stephen Hawking said that one of the biggest threats of runaway AI is the military -- also self-driving cars. So who knows what kind of Skynet precursor is being cooked up these days. Seems to me that it's a lot easier and cheaper to program a reactive computer control system than it is to keep fabricating ever-more exotic materials and building faster, stealthier, whatever-er airplanes.

Although, with a little more experience, the computers would be able to design their own superplanes.

And so it goes...


edit on 28-6-2016 by Blue Shift because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 28 2016 @ 06:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Brotherman
Sounds like a hard video game I bet a gamer that learns a simulator can kill it 🎮😁

No cheat codes in real life.



posted on Jun, 28 2016 @ 06:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bedlam
How INTERESTING. Reading this, it's like you'd be fighting a phantasm.

Ghost in the Machine.



posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 07:56 AM
link   
That an aircraft with no pilot, remotely controlled or AI controlled, can beat a human pilot is old news...years ago a Firebee with ground control routinely beat the top gun in San Diego. The reason is turn g forces limit the human. So if this test of AI vs human had the G turn advantage, result is predictable.



posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: darkstar57




and is even able to win out against these human experts when its aircraft are deliberately handicapped in terms of speed, turning, missile capability and sensors.


Supposed to take care of that , right ?



posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 10:11 AM
link   
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.



posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: one4all

That's not a good analogy. Today, computer chess AI's are universally regarded to be well beyond all grandmasters and are not tuned to anybody and don't cheat.

Deep neural networks with reinforcement learning just took an enormous jump with Alpha Go, which is self-training more and more and will soon defeat the go world champion.



posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Phantasm you say?

....now where have I heard that before...sounds familiar....now let me think.....
edit on 30-6-2016 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 03:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: one4all

You could probably protect the electronics, computer system and RAM that's running the AI from any EMP blast with a simple Faraday cage through. In fact a plane, just like a car is a Faraday cage of sorts. But this AI is still running in a simulator, i dont think "They" are ready to actually mount the device in to an actual fighter yet.


Um Wrong. =).



posted on Jun, 30 2016 @ 11:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
Phantasm you say?

....now where have I heard that before...sounds familiar....now let me think.....




This, perhaps?

(coming soon to an unsanctioned project patch near you. There are several options, obviously deus ex machina, although there are competing phrases like bellator ex machina and mortem ex machina)
edit on 30-6-2016 by Bedlam because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 12:09 AM
link   
a reply to: darkstar57

The difference here is that the Firebee was either programmed or remote piloted, it wasn't using an AI system to choose its own tactics like this test did.



posted on Jul, 1 2016 @ 06:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Bedlam

Nooooo not from the movie. Ive heard it before somewhere....phantasm.....( thinking) ......phantasm.....hmmmm.



On a side. So it works for piloted vehicles, dead piloted vehicles and as an ace up the sleeve for drone or piloted?


They shoulda hired me to clean up that small town instead of let mikey try and do it. I mean did any of those idiots ever once think about carrying a baseball bat? Id go babe ruth on those things if I saw one coming down the hall. Batter up!

edit on 1-7-2016 by BASSPLYR because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join