Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Korea To Build Front-line Combat Robot

Posted by Zonk on from the johnny-5-gets-a-gun dept.

christchurch wrote to mention the story of a plucky Korean robot that has been built for combat. From the article: "According to design blueprints released during a meeting of science-related ministers, the robot will have six or eight extendable legs with wheels allowing it to move like an insect over uneven terrain. The robot will be armed with various weapons and will operate both by remote control and its own artificial intelligence system"

43 of 293 comments (clear)

  1. has to be said. by indy_Muad'Dib · · Score: 2, Funny

    may i be the first to welcome out 8 leggeded robotic overlords.

    1. Re:has to be said. by BottleCup · · Score: 2, Funny

      yes and after the AI in the robots decide they dont need humans anymore and take over administration, I can just see the headlines now:

      Combat Robots Got Seoul!

    2. Re:has to be said. by Sugar+Moose · · Score: 5, Funny

      I've noticed a lot of people welcoming pretty much anything as an overlord. In fact, there's so many, it's as if they're taking over Slashdot.

      And may I be the first to welcome our new "welcomes everything as a new overlord" overlords. May your reign be long and prosper--aw, crap, it's over.

      They already welcomed someone else as our new overlords.

    3. Re:has to be said. by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Funny

      "has to be said."

      Why? Does the one millionth copycat get a free iPod or something?

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    4. Re:has to be said. by WindBourne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Of course, I was thinking of Bruce Schneier's infamous quote: It is poor civic hygiene to install technologies that could someday facilitate a police state. I suspect that when you or your children are on the receiving end of them, Then you will not be welcoming them. If nothing else, think kent state in vietnam era.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  2. Constantly hearing about combat-bots by aussie_a · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We're constantly hearing about combat robots, but are any in use? The only ones I know of being in use are reconnaisance robots (of numerous types) and bomb-defusing robots.

    Are there any bots out there that are designed to shoot people? I'm constantly hearing about designs for them, but I've never heard of them being put to use.

    1. Re:Constantly hearing about combat-bots by slashdotnickname · · Score: 5, Funny

      Are there any bots out there that are designed to shoot people?
      Yes, my aimbot is capable of clearing out a room of them.

    2. Re:Constantly hearing about combat-bots by jkuff · · Score: 3, Informative

      There are many Military Robots that have been actively used in the past. Most of them are drones for mapping or reconnaissance. Note that the Ottawa Treaty of 1999 forbids the production of armed autonomous robots, but South Korea obviously refused to sign the treaty (as did China, Russia, the US, and about 40 others).

      The US has used the PackBot in combat situations, but I believe it has never had munitions mounted on it. It looks like iRobot's vacuum cleaning and navigation technology in the Roomba can be reused to "sweep" for land mines in a minefield.

    3. Re:Constantly hearing about combat-bots by globalar · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Well, we can certainly mount guns on things and shoot remotely. The current, long-developing trend in military warfare is towards smaller, versatile units that are hard to pin down but are extremely coordinated. Hive-like would be a wet-dream, but I'm sure beaurocrat is having such a dream as we speak. Bottom line, robots don't yet play into this dream. They are really only good as disposable long-range swiss-army knives. This will improve over time, of course. And as you read, the border patrol part is a focus as well.

      This particular focus from SK seems to be a politically-pushed idea. Perhaps similar to the U.S. Star Wars idea in the 1980's (i.e. makes people happy, makes some contractors rich). North Korea weighs heavily on SK citizen's minds, partly because they hear so much crazy, horrible stuff about what happens in the country. Remember there is a huge infrantry deployment (for U.S. particularly) along the North Korean border, so any press about being able to one day replace these forces with robots is good press (who will hopefully just be sentrys really, because no one south of the meridian wants war).

      Also, the South Koreans are fairly keen on technology in general, similar to the Japanese. Like all of us, they love to find excuses to play with robots and grant government contracts. The SK government has invested heavily in certain industries in the past and now the market seems to be sensing the technological shift. Yesterday (way back) the hot things were conventional transport like shipbuilding. Today its robots. So the story goes, if you can get a copy of the student roster at MIT, you can find out just what the South Koreans want to become leaders in. Though, I would add a few Japanese and Chinese schools to the list now as well.

    4. Re:Constantly hearing about combat-bots by LnxAddct · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The U.S. already uses several robots in battle with them, mostly drones for mapping things. Some drones have missiles. There is also a smaller land robot that infantry can carry with them to inspect suspicious areas. There are easily about 500 other forms of robots on the drawing boards among various defense contractors. The idea is that robots can be made in any number and are dispensable, so eventually a soldier should be replaced by a robot. The robots we know exist are most likley nothing compared to what is behind closed doors. We often don't hear about the really good stuff until its about 50 to 75 years passed. With something like a robot that can fight as a soldier can, the U.S. probably would keep that under tight secrecy until the public needed to know(i.e. because we needed to use them for a large scale war). Something like that is not something you want your enemies to know about. As it is right now, if we ever had to battle a country like China where the government literally controls how many think and act and at the drop of a dime could send billions of people to war, we would need to scale up our forces, robots are the answer. One popular robot idea in the early research phase is obviously autonomous vehicles, as is shown by DARPA's annual grand challenge.
      Regards,
      Steve

    5. Re:Constantly hearing about combat-bots by grogdamighty · · Score: 2
      It is morally repugnant to an honorable person (a 'warrior') to have machines fighting wars for you.

      There is very little honorable about fighting wars in general. And there is very little more honorable than saving a life - or preventing the loss of one.

      As for your other comments, economics is the answer. If nations are willing to fight a war for economic incentives, nations should be just as willing to view the loss of million-dollar-robots as a disincentive.

      --
      My other sig is funny.
    6. Re:Constantly hearing about combat-bots by TitanBL · · Score: 4, Informative

      There are a few in use currently in Iraq. There is the Talon which can fire many different weapons (M249, .50 cal, M4A1, M24, etc). They are very accurate, more accurate than any soldier. Every EOD team seems to have one of these which they use to detonate IEDs.

      UAVs are everywhere and are common place in almost all operations. There is the Predator, which when armed with the hellfire missile system can be very leathal and the little Raven which can be utilized at the squad level. The new Viper Strike bombs, which are starting to be depoyed on UAVs, are very usefull in urban situations where you need to take out the enemy without harming innocents in say, the next room. This is a big development because the "insurgents" like to take shelter in mosques, schools, and hospitals, etc. The new Hardstop bombs help in this situation as well (but I do not think they are carried by UAVs). Anyways, here is an exellent video/story which mixes captured enemy video with the video from the UAV which nails them. I love UAVs.

    7. Re:Constantly hearing about combat-bots by ramblin+billy · · Score: 2, Interesting


      "Hive-like would be a wet-dream"

      Depending on your definition of robot, we may already have a "hive mind" controlled robot in operational use. The AEGIS Combat System is a combat control system that integrates a wide variety of sensors and weapon platforms into a single, computer controlled system. The central control computer receives data from linked sources such as radar arrays, satellites and aircraft located anywhere in the battle space. Using various algorithms, the system can track over 100 separate targets, assign priorities, choose the appropriate weapon from any of the assets under its command and target and fire the weapon remotely. An entire fleet of ships can thus act as one in presenting an integrated defense. Once the system is enabled the computer makes the individual decisions without human interaction. The humans just sit back and watch it go. That's pretty close to a hive mind. AEGIS has been around for about thirty years.

      There are also examples of "fire and forget" weapons that may be classified as robots, although not in the traditional sense. Sea mines exist that can hover, scan the area with passive sonar and deploy only when certain conditions are met. These conditions can include the detection of the acoustic signature of a single ship or group of ships. Missiles and torpedoes can lock on to a target and independently proceed to an intercept, dealing with evasive behavior and counter-measures. Some munitions, upon losing target lock, can throttle down and cruise in search patterns in the attempt to reacquire the original target or aquire a new target of opportunity. Once any of these weapons is fired, they proceed without further human input.

      The reason any of these weapons can be safely (well, safely in a battlefield sense) used is that they are confined to limited areas that are designated "free-fire zones" or are capable of differentiating between targets. That's fairly easy for ships and planes, not so easy for troops on the ground. It's easy to see how robot controlled guns could be used to repulse waves of attackers advancing through no-man's land. It's less clear how they would tell the difference between probing enemy scouts and a lost squad of their own men. Initial deployment might be on the basis of "go over HERE and let me know when you get there or detect anything on the way". Options might include "laser illuminate THIS target until follow-on munitions arrive then return to base" or "let me know if THIS target proceeds in THIS direction". It should also be remembered that acceptable levels of safety are quite different in times of war and on the battlefield. "Let loose the bots" may become the last ditch effort of desperate men.

      billy - AEGIS is currently being migrated to Open Software...could it be...Linux?

  3. I'll be baac by AdityaG · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now we just wait for the naked guys to drop outta the sky...

  4. Minor clarification by dtfinch · · Score: 5, Informative

    South Korea To Build Front-line Combat Robot.

    Some people think "North" when they hear about Korean military stuff.

    1. Re:Minor clarification by richdun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Some people think "North" when they hear about Korean military stuff.

      Of course, if the past Olympics, Asian Games, and other efforts are any indication, many Koreans are trying to disregard the directions altogether - most refer to the country as "Korea," no bloody North, South, C, or D.

    2. Re:Minor clarification by immerrath · · Score: 2, Funny

      As opposed to the USA?

  5. South Korea by ZeroPost · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think that the article summary should mention that this is being developed by _South_ Korea. The article just mentioned 'Korea', but since there are two Koreas, I wasn't sure which one they were talking about.

  6. "blueprints" by Capt'n+Hector · · Score: 4, Funny

    haha those "blueprints" are from lightwave, aren't they? In that case, I have blueprints for several deep-space capital ships, a few space fighters, and a couple of plasma guns.

    --
    Quid festinatio swallonis est aetherfuga inonusti?
    Africus aut Europaeus?
  7. Yes by Solr_Flare · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes, the USA, if I recall properly, has variations of their spy drone planes that are equipped with missle launchers. Likewise, there was an article a few months back about the US getting ready to deploy a heavily armed remote control tank-bot for "testing" in Iraq.

    But, to date we have not yet equipped, to public knowledge, a robot with weaponry that is not purely remote controlled. Armed AI robots make people nervous, and for a variety of good reasons given our state of "AI".

    Of course, we aren't talking a Skynet situation here(although some day that will likely be technically possible). Its more like not wanting a blue screen of death to literally kill you.

    --
    You are who you are, let no one tell you different. But, never close your mind to a new point of view.
    1. Re:Yes by ergo98 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The drones are expensive remote controlled airplanes - they don't really qualify as a robot.

      Why not? While one traditional definition is, err, "human like", another is quite simply a remote controlled or autonomous mechanical device. A remote controlled jet qualifies. Indeed last I heard some of those jets fly autonomous routes, triggering alerts for suspect objects, but it would just be a software change for it to start (Crazily) shooting stuff itself.

      If equipped with an autoloader, I would imagine that equipping an M1A2 with remote control would be very much achievable as well. Surprized that hasn't been done already.

    2. Re:Yes by saskboy · · Score: 4, Funny

      A robot doesn't have to have legs, or lack wings. Saying a robot can't have wings is robot discrimination, and is a violation of the Robot-Human treaty of 2001. Prepare to have your service line discontinued, to be in compliance.

      --
      Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  8. Fragging nerds by aussie_a · · Score: 3, Interesting

    You put a gun in an overweight nerds hand and shove him onto the battlefield and he's going to get killed very quickly. You put him behind the remote controls for one of these babies, and you'll have a lean-mean killing machine. Will nerds be the nest people to be drafted by the government? After all, all of those years training in Quake and Doom should make them experts wielding these babies.

    I can see it now, Korea is at war with someone else using these on the battlefield. Kim and his friends want a LAN party, so they PAY the military to for an hours worth of time renting out 5 of these. They get behind their computers, and are suddenly transported to a battlefield and they go for it. Just make sure it's programmed so that the thing can't shoot allies (perhaps the allies emit a beacon) and the kids can go for their life, trying to frag as many people as they can. It'll be all the rage!

    1. Re:Fragging nerds by Heliode · · Score: 2, Funny

      My God man! Think about what you're saying! We're talking about Korean nerds here! It'll be a black day for humanity when one of those things goes "Kekeke Zergrush ^_^".

      --
      Fox can take the sky from you.
    2. Re:Fragging nerds by FhnuZoag · · Score: 2, Funny

      Welcome to KillBot v1.2324b

      Intialising.... System ready. Readings normal.

      Please enter your command:

      > IDDQD

      Invalid

      > IDKFA

      Invalid

      > GOD

      Invalid

      > IMPULSE 9

      Invalid

      > THIS GAME SUCKS

  9. What about the Asimov rules? by Bananatree3 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Is it just me, or is the world forgetting Isaac Asimov's laws of robotics?:

    Isaac Asimov's "Three Laws of Robotics" asimov

    1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

    2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

    3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

    It seems to me that this is a casebook example of such discrase for these laws. We have forgotten what these rules, layed down by father of robotics over half a decade ago. It is sad to see how we have used something like the robot to simply continue the cycle of ever-more expensive and bloody cycle of militery technology, and now with AI to go with it

    1. Re:What about the Asimov rules? by Manchot · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Three things: First of all, Asimov lived half a century ago, not half a decade ago. Secondly, he can hardly be called "the father of robotics." He neither conceived the idea of a robot nor built any. Since none of the technology came about as a direct result of him, saying that he is the father of the field does a disservice to those who actually pioneered it. Finally, the three rules of robotics were never meant to be guidelines for people to follow. They are essentially MacGuffins, used only to advance the plot of the stories.

    2. Re:What about the Asimov rules? by SkyFire360 · · Score: 3, Informative

      He neither conceived the idea of a robot nor built any.

      False. From UTexas RRR (and many of the "forward" parts of his books):

      The word 'robotics' was first used in Runaround, a short story published in 1942, by Isaac Asimov (born Jan. 2, 1920, died Apr. 6, 1992). I, Robot, a collection of several of these stories, was published in 1950.

      ...

      In 1942, John P. Eckert, John W. Mauchly (left), and their associates at the Moore school of Electrical Engineering of University of Pennsylvania decided to build a high - speed electronic computer to do the job. This machine became known as ENIAC (Electrical Numerical Integrator And Calculator)
      Courtesy http://www.softlord.com/comp/

      He was a visionary, seeing events that would come about nearly half a century later. Computers were in their infancy; nothing more than a novelty that would barely fir into a room, much less a human-sized head... Building one was quite out of the question.

  10. Re:The AI must be really good. by russianspy · · Score: 2, Funny

    I doubt it is going to be THAT sophisticated. People running this way (and shouting are OK), people running the other way (either attacking troops OR your own defecting troops) are to be shot. Easy, eh?

  11. Depends on your definition of robot by Solr_Flare · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Most people call various expensive remote controlled devices "robots". If I make remote controlled spider vehicle is that any more a robot than a remote controlled plane? Does it have to walk on the ground to be a robot?

    Or, is a robot defined by it's AI? If so, how much control does the AI need to have to make it a robot? How sophisticated does it need to be? Depending on how loosely you define AI, you could call some modern cars robots.

    Then, after you define "robot" the next question is does the article writer using the same definition as you when they say robot?

    It's not that I'm arguing with you so much as I'm just saying the term robot is very "fuzzy" these days, especially in the military arena.

    --
    You are who you are, let no one tell you different. But, never close your mind to a new point of view.
  12. Welcome to 21st century by ingo23 · · Score: 5, Funny
    It's all much simpler.

    1. A robot must bring profit.

  13. Re:Science Vessel .. . by HermanAB · · Score: 2, Informative

    If the robot is realy designed by a military electronics company, then it will be quite immune to EMP and radiation. There are many robots in use in the military and there are sentries armed with shotguns in Iraq even. See this: http://www.spawar.navy.mil/robots/land/robart/hist ory.html

    --
    Oh well, what the hell...
  14. In Other News by hobotron · · Score: 2, Funny


    Korean Old Glory Insurance premiums have just soared overnight

    --
    There is truth in humor.
  15. Anime by Mancat · · Score: 2, Funny

    The robot will also only be pilotable by spiky-haired prepubescent boys.

    --
    hello dear sirs my name is jamesh i are india (bihar) can u guide me install red had linux 9?
  16. Re:Ethics and such... by Samedi1971 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Who's to be reponsible if one of these malfunctions and kills a bus full of school children? The programmer? The tech operating it? The government? The manufaturer? The military? Noone?

    The scapegoat, of course.

  17. Re:Ethics and such... by izomiac · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wait a second, why would "who's responsible" matter? Nobody is trying to gun down school buses, and if one did then it would be a tragic accident that people should take measures to prevent from reoccuring, not punish someone over (unless it was caused by some huge fault of theirs). Of course, I'd hope that the AI would be smarter than that (or shut down in the event of a malfunction), or that they keep loaded school buses out of war zones where these things would be deployed. Preferably both.

  18. Not to worry... by 20th+Century+Boy · · Score: 4, Funny

    As North Korea already has their own robotic countermeasures.

  19. One step closer by MacFury · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Commander: Solider! Kill that mother and small child!
    Solider: No sir! I will not kill an innocent civilian
    Commander: KillBot5000! Kill that mother and small child!
    KillBot5000 Would you like me to toture them first?

    I certainly can't wait!

  20. Re:The AI must be really good. by h4rm0ny · · Score: 2, Interesting


    Pretty simple. You declare a zone as "militarily active", or some other such pentagon-speak. In go the troops and the robots, and anything moving in there that doesn't carry a friendly radio tag gets shot at. If a "civilian" goes outside or rises off the floor or refuses to have radio-emitting "security restraining devices" hurriedly slapped on him by the soldiers, then he is "resisting" and will become a "active target".

    Sorry for all the " ". That tends to happen when a politician is trying not to say they've just commisioned a machine to kill people.

    --

    Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
  21. Those things have heads! by Godwin+O'Hitler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why would they build a battle robot with a head? To make it look more intimidating?

    Why not fit a tail too. Is there any reason a robot should be directional at all?

    The idea of armies of battle robots fighting each other all seems a bit burlesque to me. Can you imagine Robots vs Robots in a "take that hill" scenario. Who's going to surrender if there are only robots out there - and surrender what? Their sensors?

    --
    No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
  22. Nearly pissed myself laughing by Rogerborg · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wars haven't been honourable since 1485. Look it up.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  23. I'm just waiting for the first virus/worm to hit by xiando · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Building weapons like this is a bad idea. How can they ensure that the enemy, who ever they are, does not get access to the robots control system and thus turn them? By software, I assume. Software can have bugs. Bugs, on any kind of armed robot, can have disastrous effects. What if an enemy attempt at taking over the robots makes it lock it's control system from external access so even their owners can't control it anymore? What if the attack software bugs and starts viewing any biological life-form as hostile? Is it just me who gets way too many questions like that when I read about such robots? Am I the only one who gets a huge fear that the schedule for the inevitable Terminator-movies Judgment Day was just moved forward by a century? What if this robot, or the next generator, or the far more advanced version that will be produced in 10 years get infected with a computer virus, worm or just malfunctions because of a bug in the software?

    --
    9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
  24. Re:Science Vessel .. . by pooh666 · · Score: 2, Funny

    This is slashdot, it is pronouced Wessel..