

Military robots and the future of war [TED] - kvh
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/pw_singer_on_robots_of_war.html

======
endtime
He makes some good points, and it's interesting that soldiers who operate
drones remotely (from the US) suffer higher rates of PTSD than soldiers
actually in Iraq...but I felt like there was also a bit of dramatization,
perhaps because he doesn't (seem to) understand robotics/AI very well. For
example, he says that robots see an eighty year old woman in a wheelchair the
same way they see a T80 tank - just "zeroes and ones". But that's like saying
that humans see them the same way - just stimulus on rods and cones. I cringed
at that.

~~~
queensnake
Do you see his point if you substitute 'digital blob' for 'ones and zeros'?
Sure we see 'blobs' also, but we see the 'meaning' of the granny just about
inextricably too; a computer won't.

~~~
endtime
No, substituting "digital blob" doesn't help at all. Have you ever heard of
computer vision? I don't see any reason why a computer shouldn't be able to
distinguish a tank from an old woman.

~~~
queensnake
How about, '/Things like/: old women, dogs, decoy tanks, captured tanks,
someone cutting up a dead tank for scrap..'.

------
niels_olson
What concerns me is the completely vacuous presentation, complete with mention
of Zune, and hopeful talk that they won't commit war crimes, and maybe humans
are the problem. If this is the quality of philosophical thinking going in to
this problem, Nazism isn't far away.

~~~
endtime
Huh? I had issues with the talk as well, but I don't see how anything he said
leads to Nazism.

~~~
niels_olson
Lack of critical thinking (eg, completely automated rules of engagement
algorithms have been deployed for decades). Military worship (toned down, but
present).

~~~
endtime
Ooookay. Those might have been present in Nazi Germany, but I wouldn't say
that they're either sufficient or necessary for Nazism.

------
ivankirigin
This was a horrible talk.

Some points were just false (war tech is not open source, china & india don't
make US bots), lots of the visuals were misleading.

Some of his points were overly emotional and would better fit a middle school
debate than TED.

~~~
pj
Open Source projects are used in war technology. Linux powers a lot of robots.

~~~
ivankirigin
His point was that anyone could do it because it was open source. Robots
indeed almost exclusively build in Linux. That doesn't mean their designs are
open.

An exception might be the vibrant hobbyist small uav builder.

~~~
Rod
A hobbyist small UAV builder can indeed cause a lot of damage if he has evil
intent. For instance, a small UAV with half a pound of high-explosive could
glide over a "secure area" and try to hit a high-value civilian target. Much
easier than detonating a car-bomb or trying to take someone out with a sniper
rifle. Sharpshooters will have to scan the skies too (if they're not doing it
already).

Fortunately, it's not exactly easy to buy IMU's, otherwise we would have heard
of guided-missile hobbyists doing evil things. Also fortunately, GPS shuts
down above a certain altitude and speed (not applicable to GPS units belonging
to the U.S. military).

~~~
ivankirigin
There are so many more people that know how to drive a car that this kind of
threat is still nothing to worry about.

Lots of car bombers don't know there is a bomb in the car before it is
remotely detonated.

Also, snipers are really, really effective, and again, are much more common.

~~~
Rod
Snipers are effective, but they can be detected using laser technology, and
they can be neutralized by sharpshooters. What kind of counter-measure could
one use against a UAV-bomb?

------
njharman
Watch "A Taste of Armageddon"

[http://www.cbs.com/classics/star_trek/video/video.php?cid=61...](http://www.cbs.com/classics/star_trek/video/video.php?cid=619493214&pid=d4jta0HHzzIp1bwgQ10osYAyZ03XIReJ&play=true)

[http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/TOS/episode/687...](http://www.startrek.com/startrek/view/series/TOS/episode/68706.html)

Many months ago when I first learned that USAF and RAF pilots in Las Vegas, NV
were flying armed drones in a war zone "worlds" away I knew we were not far
from the scenario presented in that episode.

War needs to be painful, it needs to be bloody and costly otherwise there is
no reason to stop fighting and no arguments against starting wars and "nuke
from orbit" becomes the 1st/easiest/best answer to every problem.

~~~
jerf
The historical correlation between the in-your-faceness of war, and the amount
of war, is negative. (The news fools you; on a per-capita basis, the amount of
war is going down.
[http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth...](http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence.html))

There is no actual evidence that making war bloody and costly is an effective
strategy for preventing it.

------
GrandMasterBirt
Just the title statement iteself...

I always felt... why freaken robots, just have the leaders challange each
other in a game of chess (Kasparov will be king) and basically we make rules
based on technological levels, population, and other things, how many advisors
you are allowed to have.

They just duke it out and after the one game war is over. Everyone accepts the
outcome and the new overlords come to claim the country.

Its basically the same shit as war, except less death. We just need to figure
out a way to incorporate nukes and suicide bombing into this game and a way to
ensure propper resources are spent. After that why bother sending armies...
Just send the chess team.

