Slashdot Mirror
US Army Testing Robots with Shotguns
Darren writes "The US Army is testing robots armed with shotguns. The robots are called Packbots and have already seen some action in Iraq. It also has chemical sensors that detect nuclear, biological, and chemical contaminants. Maybe I've seen a few too many bad sci-fi movies, but robots with shotguns scare me."
Haven't we already covered the packbots and their shotgun plug-ins enough? This is pretty old news.
"The pitiful fleshy humans can have my gun when they pry it from my cold metal fingers".
Don't blame Durga. I voted for Centauri.
So much for the three laws of robotics.
"False hope is why we'll never run out of natural resources!" - Lewis Black
Here are two more older articles with more pictures. These don't mention shotguns...
The robot is controlled by an integral Pentium based computer. It uses a modular payload system offering standard (USB, Ethernet) communications and networking.
I get this mental picture of some sneaky terrorist with a Sony Vaio sneaking up to one of these packbots and plugging in his cat5...
I am a viral sig. Please help me spread.
For a minute, I pictured the Army's new class of robots being "stress tested" via shotgun fire. I was really wondering if that was such a good idea... I mean, who expects a machine to stand up to a hit from a shotgun?
I know the robots in System Shock 2 certainly didn't last long.
The speed of time is one second per second.
"kiss my shiny metal ass"
cheers,
Adolfo
Now that's just a huge fallacy.
Gore has repeatedly stated that he would have thrown the terrorists in a lock box. The key to the lock box would also be safely kept away in another lock box.
Just imagine the applications:
HUNTER'S HELPER: The lazy backwoods redneck no longer need soil his clothing or even leave the house! Simply be remotely controlling his JethroBot, he can blast away offensive and dangerous deer, squirrels, and "possums" with the flick of a switch! Sure to be a top seller at Wal-Mart stores nationwide.
FOOD FETCHER: Too damned fat to get out the door and make that McDonald's run? Add the handy tray attachment (sold separately) and your shotgun-toting buddy becomes a handy way to get grub once your limbs can no longer support your weight.
PAINTBALL III - RISE OF THE MACHINES:Sick of losing to uber-good paintball players? Buy a fleet of cyborgs, swap those 12 gauges for rapid-fire paint launchers, and tell those wusses "I'll be back". Life-size inflatable Linda Hamilton doll not included.
Thats not even an honorable death, dying from a robot?
As opposed to the "honorable death" of blowing yourself up around people just going to work?
-- "of course thats just my opinion, I could be wrong." --Dennis Miller
The arms the shotguns are attached to tend to move pretty slowly, and using them against live combatants would not be the simplist task. I think the author of the article was looking to add a little more sauce than necessary. These things are most likely being used to go into hazardous situations to collect information and handle volatile/dangerous substances/objects.
Idiot, n. A member of a large and powerful tribe whose influence in human affairs has always been dominant
Actually the US rules of engagement prohibit firing at women/childen/civilians. So if terrorist babies are shooting at US troops the usual approach now is to withdraw without returning fire, and then call in an airstrike to kill the babies (they can now be considered collateral babies), which is allowed apparently.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
Ok folks, put down the kool-aid, The US military(not sure about others) has the concept of illegal orders, wherein a grunt can refuse to comply with an order(eg kill babies point blank) due to it being illegal.
I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
There are tons of unemployed people. They can't find any other work so many are forced to enlist. They are probably a lot cheaper than robots. Having a pool of poor people to draw on is terrific for the "war president".
That sounds handy. I can't think of how many times I've found an NBC weapon and wanted to shoot it with some buckshot.
The same company that makes those cute little household vacuuming robots now has a military robot that is equipped with a pump action shotgun
So all terrorists need to do is set up one of those obstacle wire things from the accessory store, right?
(cut to scene in cave) {BAM] [BAM] "ALL YOUR CAVE ARE BELONG TO US!"
"Dammit Akbar, I thought I told you to set up the obstacle wire! Someone go take its batteries out, for god sakes."
The Pacbot weighs about 40 pounds
Okay. So does it kill terrorists by hitting them with the buckshot, or with its body that flies through the air every time it fires the gun?
And, being ankle-height, what part of the body does it aim at? Ouch...
Please help metamoderate.
It's worth quoting in full:
The wars of the future will not be fought on the battlefield or at sea.
They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall
mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by
small robots. And as you go forth today, remember always, your duty is
clear: to build and maintain those robots. Thank you.
The thing in the box has no place in the language-game at all; not even as a something; for the box might even be empty.
Analogies don't equal equalities, they are merely somewhat analogous.
These aren't nearly the first robots carrying shotguns. Bomb-disposal robots used by police bomb squads have used shotguns for several years. They're usually used for shooting locks to allow the robot to open doors to get to where the bomb is. I suppose the shotgun could alternately be used to detonate the bomb, though that would be a very expensive use since the robot would likely be destroyed in the blast.
All of these robots are remote-controlled. This is no different in concept from arming a Predator RPV with missiles. You're providing a mechanical extension of a human operator the capacity to do a specific job.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
Jerk, listen up! Just because the people you're fighting aren't constrained by the geneva conventions, doesn't mean you arent....by your logic, the geneva convention or ANY measure for that matter would be totally ineffective because if anyone were to challenge it, it would immediately die...you dig? Americans are constrained by the geneva convention, the insurgents are not...don't like it? don't go to iraq.
the guy that wrote this article, which was linked to from one of the original links is president and CEO of a well known email marketing software company. In other words, it was written by a SPAMMER. http://www.arialsoftware.com/
bullshit that 100,000 number was based off of polling random people in Iraq. It also accounted for natural deaths. Here http://www.iraqbodycount.net/database/
You may not have been paying attention, but pretty soon "don't like it? don't go to iraq." isn't going to apply to alot of us.
We shouldn't treat all people like human beings because we expect others to reciprocate. We must treat other people like human beings because we are the Shining City on the Hill, and we must set the example for others.
In any case, a better argument for the Geneva Convention would be Abu Ghraib: look at what a wonderfully effective marketing and recruiting tool those photographs were for Al-Qaida's global franchise...
[o]_O
Actually, that's incorrect. It doesn't matter if they're women or children. If they point a weapon at us, they're no longer a non-combatant and we're allowed to shoot them by whatever means available. We just tend to play nice.
It's like the mosque thing. We aren't normally allowed to attack religious buildings(why would we? It's a waste of munitions). But the moment they start using one for military purposes, like storing weapons, quartering troops, basing weapons there, etc, we're allowed to target it.
I don't read AC A human right
Look up an article about the U.S. Marines being cut to pieces by the U.S. Air Force while taking enemy fire (NYT). Messages were sent to the AF pilots to cease, but they continued to attack. I guess they were having to much fun. [That is not completely my snide observation.]
I bring this up because, the marines have a unique vehicle that should have been recognizable from the air. Moreover, this is a repeat of experiences of the first Gulf War. Supposedly these problems were solved. However, those among the honored dead are in that state due to persistent screwups. If saying it isn't so suffices for you, then you are totally misinformed or are a true believer.
We have real problems that robots alone are not going to solve. When you have idiots at the controls at the very highest levels and a media that repeats their stupid assertions. How can they ever recognize they have created a situation that can only progressively worse? Hitting the right target is not easy particularly when your enemy understands you better than we them. It appears to me we have a prescription for disaster. This is spoken by a person that believed that the Iraq adventure could possibly be successful and benefical to the Iraqi populous.
If ignorance is your guide it is all to easy to repeatedly hit the wrong targets whether by remote control, robotic or in person. That's where we are now.
If they did, they'd discover that the article is actually an excerpt of a larger article. THAT FA was written by a nutritionist/fitness guy, with a semi-nude picture of himself and his sixpack at the end of the article.
If you try to find HIS source, good luck! There are no links to credible sources on that page.
In other words, nothing to see here. This is not a credible source; it's an anti-war rant.
...not to mention the fact that the last thing you'd install on a pacbot is a pump action shotgun, which would require a little robotic arm to work the pump. If the story were remotely plausible, it would have selected a sensible semi-automatic shotgun, not a pump.
Len.