posted on Jun, 9 2012 @ 03:30 PM
reply to post by NoRemorse762
Robots are just only one of the means to obtain objectives, not the sole or even primary ones, simply because robots can never match the processing
power we humans can, more so on hostile new environments.
Thus it would be horrific waste of expenditure for a working model based solely on robotic functionality and not superior human intelligence,
espacially when it malfunctions and fails on its objectives.
Perhaps when mankind can safely presume a robot can do the job, after years of research and studies, then should humans be replace for such functions.
But by that time, we would have progressed beyond those initial objectives, onto something new and would require human oversight.
Point is - there best be caution over the concept using robots as the initial and primary means to obtain productive objectives, or millions will be
squandered. One may save on common human overhead costs using it, but the sensory systems and maintenance can bankrupt companies over the long term if
not started on the right path.
As for the utilisation of such conceptions as machines of war, it may be negligeable, for ultimately, profits rule corporations. The scope of it will
come largely from improvisation of such models for international world wide industries than selling it onto the rather limited military market. Fear
must never hinder progress, and furthermore, one can always trust human ingenuity to over come the odds, the way mankind did with planes, tanks and
ships. Such ingenuity had been proven since human civilisation began.
edit on 9-6-2012 by SeekerofTruth101 because: (no reason given)