
US Navy X-47B Robot Fighter Jet Completes First Phase Of Testing - protomyth
http://singularityhub.com/2012/06/29/us-navy-x-47b-robot-fighter-jet-completes-first-phase-of-testing/
======
kemiller
In _The Terminator_ , Skynet is supposed to have achieved sentience and turned
against its masters. But if you look at something like this from the point of
view of someone in a part of the world where the political structure is not
aligned with US hegemony, the difference between an advanced AI which has
"turned" and a robotic army that is ultimately still controlled by humans is
probably academic. I suppose that in the latter scenario there is still in
theory some humanity to appeal to, but I somehow doubt that's what's running
through your head when you're being chased by a faceless killing machine.

Then again, a closed-cockpit jet fighter isn't exactly a cuddly sight
regardless.

~~~
molmalo
Humanity?

[http://www.iraqwarlogs.com/2010/10/23/us-
commits-%E2%80%9Cwa...](http://www.iraqwarlogs.com/2010/10/23/us-
commits-%E2%80%9Cwar-crime%E2%80%9D-as-apache-helicopter-cleared-to-gun-
surrendering-insurgents/)

No, no humanity.

[http://www.channel4.com/news/iraqs-secret-war-logs-
surrender...](http://www.channel4.com/news/iraqs-secret-war-logs-surrender-
and-die)

Watch the second video. US Military considers that it is not possible to
surrender to aircrafts. So, if someone tries to surrender, they are still
valid targets, and then eliminated.

So, basically, it's the same as fighting with a totally autonomous machine.
There's no humanity in that kind of fight.

~~~
kemiller
Well, that's the point, right? People are worried about hostile AI, and how
scary it would be to be confronted by an enemy possessing overwhelming
resources and no emotional common ground. But much of the world already has
that experience.

------
droithomme
These sorts of weapons move the balance of power to where the only reasonable
defenses against the US are nuclear and bioweapons, and therefore that is
where you should start investing your research efforts in if you are not an
ally.

~~~
ghostfish
How does this type of aircraft shift the balance of power? It doesn't appear
to do anything "better" than a manned aircraft aside from not having a pilot
to lose onboard.

~~~
mbenjaminsmith
1\. With in-air refueling, a greatly increased time in the air vs manned
aircraft.

2\. Ability to outmaneuver any manned aircraft by exceeding the human g limit.

3\. Greatly lowered cost in both manufacture and pilot training (or lack of).

4\. When fully realized, AI that is superior to human pilots -- increasing
overall combat effectiveness and reducing error.

~~~
velodrome
5\. Reconnaissance

6\. Stealth

7\. Autonomy

8\. Cost of pilot death (human loss)

9\. Reduced training time

~~~
antidoh
0\. No risk of losing a human, which makes it easier to decide to attack or go
to war, and so you look more bad ass in the balance of power.

The increased willingness and ability to attack is a bad thing.

------
zokier
Fighter? Hardly:

>The mission of the Navy Unmanned Combat Air System (UCAS) Aircraft Carrier
Demonstration (UCAS-D) is to mature technologies for a carrier suitable, low
observable relevant, unmanned air system in support of a potential follow-on
acquisition milestone for an unmanned air system capable of providing
persistent, penetrating surveillance, and penetrating strike capability in
high threat areas.

Primarily a recon craft with strike capability.

------
angstrom
So how many G's can one of these pull? I imagine it's much higher than any
human fighter since the upper limit is what can safely hold the craft
together.

~~~
joeguilmette
I wouldn't imagine it needs to pull very much at all. There are no more
dogfights anymore, it's just electronic countermeasures vs electronic
detection, jamming and spoofing.

~~~
antidoh
Dodging SAMs could involve a lot of Gs.

~~~
angstrom
That's more along the lines I was thinking. Don't fighters still do evasive
maneuvers?

Of course, the SR-71 Blackbirds had one of the most effective solutions. Fly
fast and unpredictable vectors. Anything on an interception vector would be
miles off by the time it reached it's predicted location.

------
KwanEsq
I wonder how they develop the code for these systems. You'd hope it might be
something approaching the standards, rigours, and processes of the people who
write the Space Shuttle code, but I have the sad feeling it probably isn't.

~~~
ThomPete
I am pretty sure it is pretty strickt. As far as I understand code for
airplanes in general is much more encapsulated to do one thing well without
any resuability of the code as such. It's in other words strictly causal.

Fighter jets might have more of an abstract layer for all the AI stuff so this
might leave more room for an actual OS to reprogram and optimize on top off.

~~~
ThomPete
It might be perfectly possible that I am completely off on this. But my
understanding from reading about it is that software is written very
differently in airplanes than in most other fields.

Down vote is fine if I am wrong. But would appreciate to learn how I am wrong
then.

------
antoinevg
Eliezer's unfriendly AI does not need to be smarter necessarily, just better
armed.

------
simanek
Impressive, but seems like a really, really bad idea.

------
ThomBush
Super high tech, advanced-robot fighter jet... not able to retract landing
gear? (from video). Did that bother anyone else?

~~~
protomyth
Generally, the first test flights won't have an aircraft raise its gear.

[http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-
Industry/2011/02/0...](http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Security-
Industry/2011/02/07/Navy-flight-tests-new-UAV-for-
carriers/UPI-66291297084580/)

------
ygmelnikova
Shouldn't that title read "Cyberdyne Systems X-47B"?

------
gcb
Most disappointing title ever.

It's just an unmanned jet.

was expecting something like robotech/macross

