Comment Re:Faster, yes, but... (Score 1) 303
I don't really care if you're talking out of your ass. You write beautifully. I want to hear this spoken, because it was great just with the voice in my head.
I don't really care if you're talking out of your ass. You write beautifully. I want to hear this spoken, because it was great just with the voice in my head.
Agreed. I know that *technically* the units being using in Afghanistan are robots. A mechanical arm used to weld cars in a factory just following a pre-programmed series of movements is technically a robot.
But if allusions to Terminators are going to be made, then we have to consider autonomy as the real metric for a "robotic war".
IMHO, people worried about things like robotic wars are implying a problem with the robots running amok, at least primarily. True, there are other issues to consider. For instance, would a person controlling a robot from 1,000 miles away take more risks with that robot, or go in firing more freely without worrying about reprisals, as opposed to somebody inside a tank where the control is more "involved"?
But it's not like modern aircraft are directly controlled by the people inside them either. There are tons of stabilizing modifications performed per second completely autonomously just to keep a modern combat aircraft from dropping out of the sky. It's all electronic signals. And a human is controlling that at a high level whether he's sitting in the cockpit or in California with a remote joystick.
Call me when, "afterward, the Stealth Bombers flew with perfect operational records..."
Marketing will call it the "Volkswagen Scarab", and all will be right with the world.
For that matter, Electromagnetism and the Weak Force have been theorized to be the same thing: Electroweak
Hackers of the world, unite!