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 Future Of Warfare?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 08:19 PM
link   
www1.analogik.org...

anyone seen this? kinda terminator-ish, i'm sure arnold would approve!


but seriously...i wonder what a couple thousand of these things could do if unleashed into a warzone.




posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 08:25 PM
link   
For some reason the video won't load for me, but if it is the robot soldier things, then yeah i saw those on CNN this morning. I really think it is a cool thing that will help out our soldiers.



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 08:34 PM
link   
are they in existence, or just concept.



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 08:49 PM
link   
They exist, I saw a news article on Yahoo not too long ago, they are equipted with M240s and M249s, I believe they are semi-autonomous, but a person in the loop has to pull the trigger so to speak...

This will definitly help our boys out...



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 09:02 PM
link   
the link i posted is a 3D animation, probably the most amazing i've ever seen...and gives a good idea of where i think our military is moving towards in the future of automated warfare.

the below info is about the actual units that are shipping out to iraq now...




news.bbc.co.uk...

Robot soldiers' bound for Iraq
Machine-gun equipped robot
Soldering on: A private firm helped the military make the robo-soldier
The US military is planning to deploy robots armed with machine-guns to wage war against insurgents in Iraq.

Eighteen of the 1m-high robots, equipped with cameras and operated by remote control, are going to Iraq this spring, the Associated Press reports.

The machine is based on a robot already used by the military to disable bombs.

Officials say the robot warrior is fast, accurate and will track and attack the enemy with relatively little risk to the lives of US soldiers.

Unlike its human counterparts, the armed robot does not require food, clothing, training, motivation or a pension.


[edit on 23-1-2005 by enomus]



posted on Jan, 23 2005 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Hasta la vista, baby



posted on Jan, 24 2005 @ 09:10 AM
link   
how about jamming the command signal and /or capturing some to set loose back at the inventors...



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 04:04 PM
link   
I just hope it doesn't replace the soldier, and if so....








posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Daedalus3
how about jamming the command signal and /or capturing some to set loose back at the inventors...


Thats alot easier said then done your average person going against these is armed with AKs and RPGs they are not super computer hackers.

Really how many UAVs have you heard about being hacked into? Its the same thing these are just UGVs.

Hacking military weapons systems is not easy the people making these things are not stupid.



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 04:15 PM
link   
Think Voltron

I want one of these. This model is designed for general use, NOT as a military weapon. Estimated cost is about 35, 000 for the first public model, lol....



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Never trust robots...



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by amraam
Never trust robots...


You put your life into the hands of machines all the time. Every time you step into a elevator for example your life is in a machines hands.

Besides this is technically not a robot it is a remotely piloted machine.

But why should we never trust robots? Is it because they are protrayed in fiction to be evil all the time. I dont know about you but I never met a evil robot but I met alot of evil humans.



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Personally im very interested about robotics and its possibilitys. Its easy to say that robots get more accurate when their development team get more manpower and every script are taken to next after next level, meaning processing cabality just slowly increase and simple commands gain more accuracy depending on human skills and energy to give the commands and in some level human just give big picture for machine and then machine make own calculations based by that (simulation) and in the end we got autonomyous "robots" that can rewrite their own code, only question remains will these autonomyous robots remain friendly toward us?

Its almost imposible to define "evil" theres just too many factors to put it in words, so many factors can make people do stupid things, i would say acts that are done on total conscious to cause someone harm could go as "evil" act. Mostly everything else comes from biological imbalances and other factors as enviroment, still i wouldnt say only actions made as aware even are "evil" deeds.

After thinking about this whole word "evil" i cant find words for whole thing and i think there shouldnt even be anything to descripe it simple, cause the matter isnt simple. Humans in the end are just punch of signals and biological balances and we try to find reason behind all and control it. We can only continue research and try find cure about all this slowly, maybe never.



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 06:06 PM
link   

how many UAVs have you heard about being hacked into? Its the same thing these are just UGVs.

Hacking military weapons systems is not easy the people making these things are not stupid.


Shadow, I have to disagree with you there. These things would be easy to hack and I would not be surprised to see them coming back.

Any good hacker knows that hacking involves hacksaws sometimes. It would not be difficult to rip the brain out of this thing and stick a mail-order remote control system in it. I'm not saying Iraqis will do this, but if it were ever used in a real BATTLE and not this Iraq turkey-shoot, a general would have to plan for this happening. I think the same guys providing the IAD components can scrounge up some remote control junk. too.

As for the guys who make stuff for the government, yes they're smart but they do also cut corners. They wouldn't spend much dough on hardening this thing against a determined machinist and an electrician/hacker. Why would you ever think that you have better computer guys than the enemy? They have the same internet we do. Most computer hackers come from Romainia/Yugoslavia and lower asia --not exactly places that love us.

The robot junk seems silly to me. You will surely need a soldier to babysit the thing nearby, or is it intended to infiltrate buildings? Give me a break. This thing is not going to step lightly and it will be heard. Frankly, if I were a soldier facing this hunk of junk, I'd circle around, rip out its wires, sell the camera on EBay and mount the .50 cal in a pickup truck.

This is Terminator wet-dream junk dreamed up by the Military-Industrial-Complex. Garbage.

I'm ranting, but nothing personal. I think you meant radio-control/encrypted hacking anyway, which is very difficult.




[edit on 29-1-2005 by smallpeeps]

[edit on 29-1-2005 by smallpeeps]



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by smallpeeps


The robot junk seems silly to me. You will surely need a soldier to babysit the thing nearby, or it is planned to infiltrate buildings? Give me a break. This thing is not going to step lightly and it will be heard. Frankly, if I were a soldier facing this hunk of junk, I'd circle around, rip out its wires, sell the camera on EBay and mount the .50 cal in a pickup truck.

This is Terminator wet-dream junk dreamed up by the Military-Industrial-Complex. Garbage.

I'm ranting, but nothing personal. I think you meant radio-control/encrypted hacking anyway, which is very difficult.





Ive looked into these things and they are almost silent they are not noisy at all. You are underestimating these robots I wouldnt advise trying to rip the wires out of a robot armed with a machine gun if I was you.

The whole point of these things is to save US lives. If you have a building you have to clear out you have the option to send this in rather then a 18 year old kid

Sure someone with enough time perhaps a few weeks if you knew what you were doing and the right parts could gain control of this thing if they could capture it without getting gunned down. Thats also assuming that there is no selfdestruct or anti-tampering measures built in. Making a robot even a remote control one is no easy task its not as simple as just plugging in your own store bought contoler.

Besides if you can make your own control system,programs,motor controler,sensor interface for one of these you can pretty much make your own no need to risk your life trying to capture on.


I dont know how you can call this thing garbage if it has the ablity to save even one soldiers life. Its cheaper and more effective to use a human but how much is a human life worth to you.

[edit on 29-1-2005 by ShadowXIX]



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 06:40 PM
link   

Besides if you can make your own control system,programs,motor controler,sensor interface for one of these you can pretty much make your own no need to risk your life trying to capture on.


Well, going out and building one takes time and factories. However, if Uncle Sam delivers one to the enemy's doorstep, they'll use it.

Your point about self-destruct is important. Yes, I could see some kind of thermite charge to melt the thing or even just a couple claymores mounted on it. However you'd have to imagine accidents happening where the thing 'thinks' its been stolen and therefore self-destructs when it's actually right near some of our boys. Not good. Trusting machines to tell the difference between one human and another is not easy... Yet.

I have a question though: Do you ever see this thing being turned on you? I ask because your statement about robots is intriguing. I personally shudder at the prospect of walking, humanoid robots like ASIMO or whatever that Japanese thing is called. I have nightmares of those things holding pepper spray and tazers.

I understand what you are saying about saving soldiers lives. I just think there are better ways to do it. Politics would be better than this. If America had planned correctly, they could have taken Iraq with nothing but hand grenades and rifles. As for the long term, I think warfare will be terminal to humans so I see anti-war sentiment as our only hope, as silly as that sounds.



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 06:55 PM
link   
I could invision them being used on me because they only do what they are told they will follow a evil master just as much as good one. I dont think robots on their own will ever pull a ''turn on their masters'' type thing though. I dont think AI will ever be able to work on a emotional level were they think they have to compete with us carbon types. They might act to preserve their own life someday but I dont think it will ever go beyond that, Well not in my lifetime atleast.

About the humanoid robots if Japan has their way they are comming whether we want them or not they are really behind the humanoid robots for some reason. Personally I think the human design is not that good there are so many better designs to pick from in nature. Bugs offer far better body designs.Now a armed spider shaped robot that would be as fast and able to climb like a spider now thats the stuff of nightmares.



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 07:07 PM
link   

I dont think robots on their own will ever pull a ''turn on their masters'' type thing though.


I agree with you. It's the question of who's holding the remote that affects me. These things seem like playthings of the rich and those who lust after war.

Also, you know US history I assume. US troops have been called out in this country before. If the future you describe comes to pass, it is a certainty that your robot spiders will take that position. Kent State circa 2018 will look very different.

I just wanted to get on the record and say this device is a bad idea.



[edit on 29-1-2005 by smallpeeps]



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 07:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX

Originally posted by Daedalus3
how about jamming the command signal and /or capturing some to set loose back at the inventors...


Thats alot easier said then done your average person going against these is armed with AKs and RPGs they are not super computer hackers.

Really how many UAVs have you heard about being hacked into? Its the same thing these are just UGVs.

Hacking military weapons systems is not easy the people making these things are not stupid.


I know sixteen year olds that hack into the Los Alamos Nuclear Lab on a monthly basis. To, "hack" isn't all that hard and could be done, but using EM weapons would be the best way to render the "robots" useless...



posted on Jan, 29 2005 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by faddinglight

I know sixteen year olds that hack into the Los Alamos Nuclear Lab on a monthly basis. To, "hack" isn't all that hard and could be done, but using EM weapons would be the best way to render the "robots" useless...


How many of them hack into military weapons systems? Its one thing to hack into a computer with a land line hook up to the internet in some lab quite another to hack into remote robot in the field.

Hacking is always easier said then done



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join