And who will be held responsible, when the robot with a taser "makes a mistake" and zaps a suspect 47 times? That will be "unforeseeable software problems", right?
funniest part is, it won't be someone ELSE taping it...the robot will be incriminating itself (that is until robots are given the same constitutional rights as humans...)
Due to "unforeseeable software problems", the operator's giggling and heavy breathing will not be recorded. Nor will the identity of the officer giving the order.
doesnt these robots kinda take the whole point of the army out.. just give the remotes to 12 - 14 yr olds and they will kick everyones ass like they seem to do on gears of war... and raibow six... and wellne games that comeout..
Hmm a pac-bot or a Hummer2? Why does that little thing cost $45,000 when most of it's parts are available in stores? Because the taxpayer is paying for it so they jack the price up as usual.
Hummers are a lot more expensive than 45000 dollars. It is so expensive because it has to be built to take any combat situation in mind, whether it is damaged or not. Believe me the military doesn't lie about the price of its goods, they have people that audit the military just for this reason.
pisschrist said:
doesnt these robots kinda take the whole point of the army out.. just give the remotes to 12 - 14 yr olds and they will kick everyones ass like they seem to do on gears of war... and raibow six... and wellne games that comeout..
Well, at least they will be pretty well practiced because of the widespread popularity of de_dust
But seriously, it will be interesting to see our perception of war change as our losses become solely monetary, whereas the poorer nations will not have these robots, and the wars will be fought in their countries, not ours.
But then again, necessity is the mother of all invention, and history shows us that even in the face of insurmountable odds, warfare can adapt to neutralize the advantages of having a very large/advanced army (thermoplyae, vietnam, iraq)
pisschrist said:
doesnt these robots kinda take the whole point of the army out.. just give the remotes to 12 - 14 yr olds and they will kick everyones ass like they seem to do on gears of war... and raibow six... and wellne games that comeout..
Well, at least they will be pretty well practiced because of the widespread popularity of de_dust
But seriously, it will be interesting to see our perception of war change as our losses become solely monetary, whereas the poorer nations will not have these robots, and the wars will be fought in their countries, not ours.
I don't think that perception will change much, will it? America hasn't fought a foreign war on its own soil since 1812, IIRC. GIs in Vietnam used to call going home "going back to the world", after all.
Britain's much the same; but we're more used to the consequences of our colonial/imperial past coming home to roost. It would be a mistake to think of America as immune, I think.
But then again, necessity is the mother of all invention, and history shows us that even in the face of insurmountable odds, warfare can adapt to neutralize the advantages of having a very large/advanced army (thermoplyae, vietnam, iraq)
Big battalions are the way to bet, sure. Question is how you define "big".
From sock Puppet,
I don't think that perception will change much, will it? America hasn't fought a foreign war on its own soil since 1812,
Do you mean a foreign army, because if you do you are incorrect, in world war 2 American troops fought the Japanese in Alaska. The funny thing is this has been referred to as the forgotten war, due to how little known the conflict in Alaska was. Honestly I think the terrorists in Iraq are ingenious, these guys are really good at killing American soldiers.The death count for American soldiers is relatively low in comparison to other wars, however the death count for civilians Iraqi and Ameican and foreign contractors are huge. Life altering injuries for US troops are in the forty thousand range as well. America is opting on this right now to lower troop risk and I actually think it is a cost effective and life saving idea. However fully mechanized war won't be for a while we will see full scale Cyber war or information warfare first.
aldoushuxley said:
From sock Puppet,
I don't think that perception will change much, will it? America hasn't fought a foreign war on its own soil since 1812,
Do you mean a foreign army, because if you do you are incorrect, in world war 2 American troops fought the Japanese in Alaska. The funny thing is this has been referred to as the forgotten war, due to how little known the conflict in Alaska was.
I did mean a foreign army; thank you, I stand corrected.
Edit: I have to say, I don't honestly think that counts. Three islands in the Aleutians, mostly evacuated already and populated by (non-white) Aleuts without any sort of cultural identification by Americans. That's only a foreign war on American soil in name.
The land that was taken was in the Aleutian chain, however airborne attacks went as far inland as Juneau Sitka and Ketchikan. Kind of cool huh, I bet you 85% percent of Americans don't even know this information. The reason is because at the time FDR did not want the information to get out because it would cause the nation to panic even further.
There's some very funny stories about Ernest Hemingway getting permission and equipment from the Navy to outfit his fishing boat to hunt them. Word has it he and his men mostly motored about getting drunk and throwing the grenades at fish and never found a single uboat.
There's some very funny stories about Ernest Hemingway getting permission and equipment from the Navy to outfit his fishing boat to hunt them. Word has it he and his men mostly motored about getting drunk and throwing the grenades at fish and never found a single uboat.
My grandfather bombed German u-boats in the Caribbean, and the Alaskan islands were Attu and Kiska.
SockPuppet
I'm lost
July 2006
JUL 15, 2007 05:20 PM