PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Anthony on August 19, 2019, 05:40:05 AM
-
THE US Navy wants to build a fleet of ten robot warships over the next five years.
The huge ships referred to as Large Unmanned Surface Vehicles (LUSVs) would function as scouts for the main battle fleet, carrying radar and sonar as well as anti-air and cruise missiles.
“The LUSV will be capable of semi-autonomous or fully autonomous operation, with operators in-the-loop (controlling remotely) or on-the-loop (enabled through autonomy).”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9747088/us-navy-robot-warship-unmanned/
More and more we see the Air Force using unmanned aircraft, "UAV's, and now we will see unmanned ships, and I am sure ground forces. Unmanned tanks, and robotic soldiers. All connected with software to allow situational awareness with their counterparts and air, and sea assets.
Artificial Intelligence will rule the battlefield. "Autonomy" is a term used over and over. It this a good thing? Is taking the human element out of war a positive?
-
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9747088/us-navy-robot-warship-unmanned/
More and more we see the Air Force using unmanned aircraft, "UAV's, and now we will see unmanned ships, and I am sure ground forces. Unmanned tanks, and robotic soldiers. All connected with software to allow situational awareness with their counterparts and air, and sea assets.
Artificial Intelligence will rule the battlefield. "Autonomy" is a term used over and over. It this a good thing? Is taking the human element out of war a positive?
Skynet?
-
-
Skynet?
I think that is a possible if not likely scenario, but my main concern is that war won't have human consequences, and therefore will be easier to wage. If there is little risk to humans what is the incentive to negotiate peaceful solutions?
Robots, drones, and unmanned ships fighting each other with the humans sitting behind the lines or even in a room somewhere at home WATCHING as Artificial Intelligence manages the battlefield way better than humans can do.
-
My rational side says like any tool it could be used for great good or great evil. All depends on who is using it and even then, your point of view. But we have no choice, we must go forward with this stuff, because our enemies certainly will.
-
My rational side says like any tool it could be used for great good or great evil. All depends on who is using it and even then, your point of view. But we have no choice, we must go forward with this stuff, because our enemies certainly will.
I agree. However, with AI making the calls, will the "good guys" really be in control? It is giving the tool the ability to reason, and act on its own. What if the software has a glitch? What if the AI ignores commands, or refuses to be turned off?
We've seen this in Sci Fi like "Hal" the computer in 2001 a Space Odyssey, and of course The Terminator which Lucifer referenced with his Skynet comment. I am not saying it will be exactly like that, but the potential is there. Look at the problems Amazon, and Google are having with their Intelligence Gathering devices, Alexa and Siri. People turn them off, yet they are still listening, giving information to people that shouldn't have it.
-
I think that is a possible if not likely scenario, but my main concern is that war won't have human consequences, and therefore will be easier to wage. If there is little risk to humans what is the incentive to negotiate peaceful solutions?
Robots, drones, and unmanned ships fighting each other with the humans sitting behind the lines or even in a room somewhere at home WATCHING as Artificial Intelligence manages the battlefield way better than humans can do.
I agree to a point. Drones fighting drones is all well and good until your side runs out of drones. Then you are defenseless as the other side turns their AI Drones on the humans. Even threatening to do so would bring about capitulation and peace pretty fast
-
I agree to a point. Drones fighting drones is all well and good until your side runs out of drones. Then you are defenseless as the other side turns their AI Drones on the humans. Even threatening to do so would bring about capitulation and peace pretty fast
That is what people forget when they talk about those kinds of battles. Yes, they take the human blood and guts out of the equation,
until one side wins and leaves the other side defenseless. Then it is either a slaughter or a capitulation (unconditional surrender). The only time in history that has ever worked out for anyone was when the USA was the victor.
-
That is what people forget when they talk about those kinds of battles. Yes, they take the human blood and guts out of the equation,
until one side wins and leaves the other side defenseless. Then it is either a slaughter or a capitulation (unconditional surrender). The only time in history that has ever worked out for anyone was when the USA was the victor.
I wouldn't want that scenario, especially if China was the victor. Or the Democrats.
-
I agree. However, with AI making the calls, will the "good guys" really be in control? It is giving the tool the ability to reason, and act on its own. What if the software has a glitch? What if the AI ignores commands, or refuses to be turned off?
We've seen this in Sci Fi like "Hal" the computer in 2001 a Space Odyssey, and of course The Terminator which Lucifer referenced with his Skynet comment. I am not saying it will be exactly like that, but the potential is there. Look at the problems Amazon, and Google are having with their Intelligence Gathering devices, Alexa and Siri. People turn them off, yet they are still listening, giving information to people that shouldn't have it.
I don’t see any problem with it. Software is infallible, never needs to be shut down and rebooted, and can never be hacked.
Oh, and I live in Wisconsin.
-
I think that is a possible if not likely scenario, but my main concern is that war won't have human consequences, and therefore will be easier to wage. If there is little risk to humans what is the incentive to negotiate peaceful solutions?
It doesn't have consequences until someone loses the robot war. Then the loser has severe human consequences because robots don't have a conscience about who or how many people they kill. And what person are you going to tag the killing back to? Nobody pulled the trigger, a machine made the decision and did it.
-
It doesn't have consequences until someone loses the robot war. Then the loser has severe human consequences because robots don't have a conscience about who or how many people they kill. And what person are you going to tag the killing back to? Nobody pulled the trigger, a machine made the decision and did it.
I would tag the leadership controlling the robots and allowing the robots to make those decisions. They would be held as war criminals, and tried at a Nuremberg style trial. ONLY IF THEY LOST.
The machine made the decision, but why did the human leadership not recall, or turn off the robots prior to them making the decision to perform war atrocities. However, maybe the robots ignored their commands? Hmmmmm. Slippery slope.
-
That is what people forget when they talk about those kinds of battles. Yes, they take the human blood and guts out of the equation,
until one side wins and leaves the other side defenseless. Then it is either a slaughter or a capitulation (unconditional surrender). The only time in history that has ever worked out for anyone was when the USA was the victor.
^^^^THIS. This is literally true. The U.S. being a unique experiment in freedom, does not conquer and occupy, it conquers and rebuilds until the country can stand on its own. Look at Japan and Germany and South Korea. It is vital the U.S. remain the strongest military force in the world.
-
The greatest threat with robotic warfare is the risk of an individual taking control of the software and using it to eliminate all rivals for power within the winning government, thus becoming a dictator without the risk of a fight.
-
^^^^THIS. This is literally true. The U.S. being a unique experiment in freedom, does not conquer and occupy, it conquers and rebuilds until the country can stand on its own. Look at Japan and Germany and South Korea. It is vital the U.S. remain the strongest military force in the world.
Spot on. All we ask is for a place to bury our dead.
If you want a powerful afternoon, page through the website of the American Battle Monuments Commission that is charged with overseeing and staffing every foreign military cemetery for US Servicemen.
https://www.abmc.gov/
It’s also good to send that to any snot-nosed, basement-dwelling leftist who complains about American imperialism because they have McDonalds restaurants in their country. These people have no idea that the US is the most selfless, giving country on the face of the earth.