Slashdot Mirror
Packs of Robots Will Hunt Down Uncooperative Humans
Ostracus writes "The latest request from the Pentagon jars the senses. At least, it did mine. They are looking for contractors to 'develop a software/hardware suite that would enable a multi-robot team, together with a human operator, to search for and detect a non-cooperative human subject. The main research task will involve determining the movements of the robot team through the environment to maximize the opportunity to find the subject ... Typical robots for this type of activity are expected to weigh less than 100 Kg and the team would have three to five robots.'"
To be fair, they plan to use the Multi-Robot Pursuit System for less nefarious-sounding purposes as well. They note that the robots would "have potential commercialization within search and rescue, fire fighting, reconnaissance, and automated biological, chemical and radiation sensing with mobile platforms."
User-agent: *
Disallow: /
Co-Funded by the I.R.S.
Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
[Mr. Kinney points a pistol at ED-209]
ED-209: [menacingly] Please put down your weapon. You have 20 seconds to comply.
Dick Jones: I think you better do as he says, Mr. Kinney.
[Mr. Kinney drops the pistol on the floor]
Dick Jones: [ED-209 advances, growling]
ED-209: You now have 15 seconds to comply.
[Mr. Kinney turns to Dick Jones, who looks nervous]
ED-209: You are in direct violation of Penal Code 1.13, Section 9.
[Entire room of people in full panic trying to stay out of the line of fire, especially Mr. Kinney]
ED-209: You have 5 seconds to comply.
Kinney: Help me!
ED-209: Four... three... two... one... I am now authorized to use physical force!
[ED-209 opens fire and shreds Mr. Kinney]
Sounds fun, they should make it a game show. Big prize if you can survive a week without capture.
to welcome our new military robotic overlords.
https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html
This is eerily reminiscent of the "mechanical hound" from Fahrenheit 451
.... can I just shoot them if they try to hunt me down? What about a nice EMP blast? And will they be armed? Or will they behave more like searchers from the Chronicles of Riddick?
I'm really not sure if I'm looking forward to that. Either they won't be armed, and they'll be easily disabled, or they will be, and then.... Meh.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
I, for one, Welcome our new Robotic Overlords.
Having robots deal with uncooperative subjects could ultimately help keep police safer, but unfortunately it creates a major imbalance of power. The use of robots in this manner could become a real problem in the hands of governments that wish to strike down on protestors and others who engage in peaceful civil disobedience. The prospects are truly frightening, although I suppose in the end protestors will figure out a way to build an army of unarmed, uncooperative robots to take the place of unarmed, uncooperative citizens.
"In prison you just have to shut your eyes and take it. Here you have to shut your eyes and give it."
Wasn't something like this on TV some time ago. They had several bomb disposal robots chassis reconfigured with several different sets of cameras (infra-red, wide-angle, zoom lens, rear-view), and a mounting point for a rifle with zoom optics.
Previous slashdotters had suggested that the best defence would be to tip the robots over, build some ground-traps or hide in a river.
Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
Come with me if you want to live.
I am the unwilling control for my Origin.
is hardly worth the money -- if he wants to and is trying to get found, he'll just yell "help" or something. Both Osama and a guy passed out under a broken building are "non-cooperative" by definition.
On the way home I need:
- toothpaste
- beer
- cereal
- aluminum foil (for tin hat)
Once home:
- google "conspiracy theories"
- google "howto electromagnetic pulse"
- google "group robot porn"
greed@All_Evils:~#
I think we really need these now:
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 to 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.
— I. Asimov
Upward mobility is a slippery slope - the higher you climb the more you show your ass.
Please let me know who the "socialist/communist" candidate is in this election so that I can be sure to vote against him or her. Thanks. Oh yes and I am intrigued by your ideas and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Wouldn't make more sense to capture and enslave all the cooperative humans first?
Then the uncooperative ones can be terminated...
Because I'm all for it! No more self-important thug, no more trash TV! it's win-win!
So often I have heard the internet meme that American soldiers (or soldiers of a western "civilized" country would not turn their weapons on their own people. Indeed, it is hard enough for them to do so to an Iraqi whom they still perceive as "human". However through indoctrination, and a process of dehumanizing the enemy, many Iraqis have died. Well, what happens if the next stage in de-humanizing comes not from propaghanda (which is not infalliable) but from a physical disconnect from targets.
Think about it... It is much easier for a sharp shooter to take out a target at a thousand yards then it is for someone to execute someone at point-blank. It is much easier for a remote drone to drop a bomb than a fighter-pilot to do so.
It is much easier for a robot controlled by a human operator to fire on civilians than an armed soldier, even if the civilian is a thousand yards away....
What if the uncooperative human is the one *controlling* the robots?
welcome our new, robot hunting packs.
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Oh, right. Could they manage to fuel the robots off of metabolized human flesh? Oh, and make their heads look like skulls.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Their not planning on using these in the Constitution-Free Zone are they?
...EX-TER-MI-NATE!!!
Paleotechnologist and connoisseur of pretty shiny things.
But what if I comply? I was told I had ten seconds to comply!
Most of those projects never produce anything but expensive trash.
Yeah, but the ones that do make something usefull often balance out the cost. Example: the thing you're using right now.
Okie dokie. On the 2008 election there are two communist/socialist candidates: Barack Obama and John McCain.
Hope that helps! ;)
Send your spendthrift head of state this
This could be loads of fun. Break some superfluous law to engage them, run them through an electromagnetic field, go in and out of a store that has scanners... I could spend a whole day playing with them and drive their "keepers" nuts.
So now you can vote the way the TV/Radio/Movies/College Profs want you to vote, or you can vote for freedom.
"But a TV professor just told me to vote for freedom... error... error... -explodes-"
It worked! We destroyed those packs of conservative-hunting robots with sheer dislogic! America is once again saved!!!
it's not a bad idea.
Think about it. Some poor schmucks in the Army have to search a building in Iraq. They go in, scared to death that someone is going to come around a corner and shoot them or they will come across a boobie trap. So, they unleash hell on the place, and shoot anything that moves. Or they just have the predator drop a bomb on the building.
It would be better that someone could remotely send a robot in and have them look for people, and figure out what's going on. Actually, what would be better is if we didn't have the f'ing war, but that's kind of OBE now.
Also, this would be helpful for firefighters that have to go into burning buildings to find a child under a bed. But, I doubt that this is really what they are thinking about.
Oh, please.
My daughter was just a few minutes ago telling me about a friends husband. He had signed on to the Army as a photographer AND as a conscientious objector. After being sent to Iraq a couple weeks ago, he is a mess. He is now a guard in a military prison, I suspect, with orders that do not sit well with him. The military knows nothing of "intended purpose". If it can be used to kill, it will be.
Maybe the military understands that if they can take the PERSONAL out of killing, it will be easier for people like the man I just described to go out and KILL.
And before you say it, I realize the man had unrealistic expectations. Ahh, the folly of youth. Isn't it a wonderful thing?
INTRODUCING THE ROBO-STALKER 2000!
...stupid lameness filter
Where can I buy one?!
I wish I had a scanner so I could post the print photo. It's a runner in modern gear sprinting across a field of cut straw being chased by four hounds and two dozen mounted men wearing traditional suits.
So this is where Skynet started at
because eventually some of them will evolve into real hotties
he wants his Daleks back.
As militaries get stronger, as nations become more powerful, as even individual human attain powers of substantial destruction, we need to start looking at how we organize ourselves as a society.
Clearly, we are on the brink of enabling every techno-nightmare ever conceived.
Simply trying to "stop the bad guys" isn't going to work anymore. We need to change the way we govern ourselves. That's the point behind the Metagovernment project; combining the principles of open source and democracy with the new capabilities enabled by emerging web technologies.
Are you in, or would you like to see where developments like military human-hunter robot swarms take us in another couple of decades?
So now let me put in a couple requests at my local gun shop... EMP grenades and scramble grenades. And yes, my contact at UNATCO is still good for it.
---- Liquid was a patriot ----
Everybody is so busy hating on their big-brother government that they can't possibly see any legitimate use for a group of robots that would hunt down a human.
What, then, I might ask, is the purpose of a SWAT team? And why must SWAT officers die saving innocent hostages, thwarting bank robberies, and so forth, when we could use robots instead?
Anyone have the source code to Pacman?
So are you going to write the AI code that implements those laws? Because I'm pretty sure they can't be coded very easily. (And they can be subverted, if you look at the later books...)
"uncooperative subject" simply means a person who is not acting by a set of rules that might put the robot at an advantage. Meaning, that person is not cooperating with the robots.
Assuming "uncooperative" has anything to do with laws or socially accepted behavior is simply projecting your fears and creating a context that was previously not there. It is simply another way of saying, "testing in the real world with no handicaps for the robots."
They don't show him getting his ass legally handed back to him when his bogus warrants are rebuted and refused for cause by someone that actually knows the law. Not to mention all the entrapment of Bail Bench Warrants that he is operating a business to process the accused so fast that the many growing ones that could produce the original note disclosing the equitable relationship between an administrator-acting judge not a dejure judge with oath and bond.
Bail has nothing to do with law, it is a statute/private. it is built on private credit in contract, not lawful money pursuant to the Coinage Act.
Dog likes his job because he feels like a man judging who is guilty and who is innoncent at the end of the day, then has to sleep with such a cracksmoker of a wife. I bet you all would love to hear his potty-mouth just as I once heard from across the road when he was trespassing on someone's rare herb/liberty garden to get nearer to allegedly "arrest" and "detain" someone for not being able to pay his parking ticket due poverty.
In my experience, "non-cooperative" is simply used to describe "a person who doesn't want to be found". It is a technical term used to distinguish "search and rescue" scenarios (where the subject of the search is cooperative and will be lighting flares and such) from "search and destroy" or "search and intercept" scenarios. Different search patterns would be used in the different scenarios.
It probably does NOT mean "hunting down a person who didn't answer a (police|military) officer's question". It is simply a technical term used in the research community to distinguish robotic search scenarios.
Let's build them as bipedals with a lightweight frame, like a bird. And on the end of each foot will be an eight inch curved steel claw.
And that new car out in the driveway, which happily rats out it's location so they can tow it away when you become 'uncooperative' about making payments towards the balance you owe.
Currently, dogs are used for this purpose, and they do it rather well. Some millions of years of design have gone into it. Getting a robot to move in complex terrain would be a bitch of a job. I can see that you can armor a robot more easily than a dog, so it would be more useful in flat terrain that has sniper positions. Are these robots primarily for use in Republican voting territory?
I once saw a documentary on how clever hunting spiders were. Given the small brain size, they might be a useful model. You might even be able to clone a spider brain and use in an eight-legged robot. Of course, it would regard everyone as legitimate prey, and suck out the juices on capture. But that would guarantee the un-cooperative fugitive bit. They would have to have a 'disarm' capacity, such as waving a Library of Congress card at them. That way, a small elite could survive if they got loose in Washington. Of course, it would then test your ability to read, so that all the illiterate Congressmen with complimentary cards would still be doomed.
I assume they would be programmed to avoid 5 sided buildings. So if you chalk a pentagon around you, you would be safe from the devils.
Packs of Robots Will Hunt Down Uncooperative Humans
Packs of uncooperative humans will hunt down robots and steal their batteries.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
i robot
Title card: Law I / A robot may not harm a human or, by inaction, allow a human being to come to harm
Title card: Law II / A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the first law
Title card: Law III / A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the first or second law
and then I found this...
http://www.irobot.com/index.cfm
I see that it has the "skynet" tag...but what about the "whatcouldpossiblygowrong" tag?
nevermind...looks like someone added.
strange thing too...I was watching T3 (bluray) just a few hours ago.
Please let me know who the "socialist/communist" candidate is in this election so that I can be sure to vote against him or her. Thanks. Oh yes and I am intrigued by your ideas and wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Ask Joe the Plumber - the guy who dared to actually question Dear Leader - whose supporters rummaged through data on him held by various Ohio government agencies.
Dare to bet against that tip being true?
...by selling my complete set of Magnus: Robot Fighter comics on eBay!
Learn the secrets of master robot fighter MAGNUS NOW, before it's TOO LATE!
Guaranteed! This comment 100% Anthrax free!
I can only surmise that americans have a deep seated desire for self destruction and dictatorship to allow their military to develop the tools of their own oppression. Because that will be these robots' first and foremost application. We all know what's coming in USA with these digital "voting" systems and democracy isn't on their agenda. They started a war to drive up oil prices and got the world to pay hundreds of billions in profits to oil companies, while military industrial corporations got hundreds of billions in war profits. Now the third branch of power, the banks got what they wanted. All paid for by the taxpayers being robbed.
An "uncooperative human" is one that is actively avoiding being found... someone who is evading capture. A "cooperative human" would be like a pack of boyscouts who got lost but are trying to be found by search parties (light signal fires, etc.).
Nothing like sensationalizing a title to get a lot of :NERDRAGE: on /.
No. It is where Santa Bot started.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
No mention of Old Glory robot insurance?? \ for shame. http://www.robotcombat.com/video_oldglory_hi.html
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order- Ed Howdershelt Via Tass
Down in the park
Where the machmen meet
The machines are playing `kill-by-numbers
Down in the park with a friend called `five
I was in a car crash
Or was it the war?
Well, Ive never been quite the same
Little white lies like I was there
Come to zom-zoms, a place to eat
Like it was built in one day
You can watch the humans
Try to run
Oh, look, theres a rape machine
Id go outside if it looks the other way
You wouldnt believe
The things they do
Down in the park
Where the chant is death, death, death
Until the sun cries morning
Down in the park with friends of mine
We are not lovers
We are not romantics
We are here to serve you
A different face but the words never change
And what happens when VIKI decides that humans must be controlled to ultimately not harm themselves and remain in compliance with the three laws?
Here's one more redundant post to add to yours :).
This sounds an awful lot like the "spiders" from the movie Minority Report. The scary thing is, we are probably about a year or two away from being able to construct a working model for such a robot, both as an offensive tool and for reconnaissance missions. Combined with augmented reality and recent bio-technological advances, these could be quite formidable.
We're already able to control machines using slabs of neurons from rat brains and "train" them to do our bidding via a reward system through electrical stimulation. All you'd have to do is start recursively networking these neuron-based controllers using a hierarchical system (where neurons train other neurons on a much grander scale) and you could literally have thousands of these things acting as a single unit, able to adapt as needed to accomplish a set task.
With any luck, they won't turn on us and start indiscriminately shredding human bodies clean to the bone like a school of piranhas. With thousands of them boasting a collective intelligence and a desire to take you down, you'd never stop them all.
8==8 Bones 8==8
just made the devil horns symbol and held it in front of the boars face while going "neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee" until it fell asleep
knowing that was before you, you msut reexamine yourself and conclude you're a monster
and then, in the bottomless pits of your tearful self-loathing, remember you have a way out in the loaded gun by your bed
have a nice day ...i'm joking of course, but in all seriousness, that's why i think loaded guns in the house are lame: for every scenario where they are used on an intruder successfully, there are 10 other scenarios where they are used on the house occupants: self-inflicted in a moment of despondency, self-inflicted by a child, used on an inhabitant in the dark sneaking in the window because they forgot their keys, used on a wife in the heat of a giant flare up, used on someone while drunk or high, etc. oh these scenarios will never happen to you? you are a superhuman impervious to basic human weaknesses for all time?
guns in fact do solve many of the problems gun proponents claim they do. its just that guns create more problems than they solve. and you never hear gun proponents examine gun tragedies. oh you lock them up? so your kid can't get the keys anyways and they are not curious? so you have the time to retrive your gun in the locked case as the robber wakes you opening the bedroom door?
just admit the tragedies outweigh the benefits already gun proponents
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Calling Magnus, Robot Fighter http://www.internationalhero.co.uk/m/magrbt.htm or his dad....
Paramount already created such a thing for Minority Report. Why don't they just borrow those? ;)
Ah, I was wondering what sort of creature, now that lions are more or less protected, was going to be used to dismember Christians for spectacle. Now we know. I'll give it about 40-60 years. Another 10-25 on top of that for free-thinking intellectuals in general. Welcome to the new cosmocracy, sponsored by the freaking Discovery Channel.
And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it.
And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.
And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
-- Isaiah 2: 2-4 (KJV)
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us." -Jesus Christ The Lord's Prayer
My robots are dogs.
Your wish is granted.
http://www.votesocialist2008.org/
Have fun!
When Barack Obama and a Democrat supermajority are elected, horrible crimes like this will stop. Only Republicans want to do things like this.
The humans are dead!
So often I have heard the internet meme that American soldiers (or soldiers of a western "civilized" country would not turn their weapons on their own people.
Too late dude. That's so 1878.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
If you actually believe this nonsense about "potential for search & rescue applications" you are delusional.
The U.S. was founded on the idea that government can never be trusted, ever. And that it always needs to be kept in check. And yet somehow this doesn't scare the crap out of people. What happened to those Americans that knew Government couldn't be trusted?
I wonder if the robots in the "Constitution Free Zone" (google it) will have a weapons free status.
Someone has been watching too much TV. They're almost as retarded as your average SlashDotter.
So your saying that in addition to my anti-zombie kit, I now need a vast array of expensive, high-tech, non tax-deductable anti-robot weaponry as well?!
You are where you are at the time you are there.
MenschenjÃger Mark Elf.
Techno-nightmare? Obviously it is in fact a techno-dream for someone, or they would not be making it.
very rare and expensive. doesn't apply as a lesson in general about gun ownership. but one would hope ownership of this expensive rare fire arm increases for those who think guns helps them
"Statistical link or shut the fuck up. Feelings aren't facts."
yes i've been down this road of dueling statistics with gun ownership advocates. its a short retarded road which does not illuminate and entrenches people in their preestablished bias
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misuse_of_statistics
i'm not going to appeal to your feelings. i'm going to ask you to look at the rate of use of a firearm in a typical firearm owning household, when it is used effectively to deter an intruder, versus not one scenario with a bad outcome, but 10 other scenarios, or 100 other scenarios, or a thousand other scenarios where a gun can be used tragically, rather than heroically. and i would like you to quantify, fairly, in your mind, the rate of heroic use of gun ownership, with the tragic use of gun ownership. the rates of tragedy might even be much lower. but the tragic scenarios certainly are more numerous than the heroic ones. i don't see how you could disagree with that
"I have been to 15 competitions where there were over 400 fully armed people competing with each other in their skill at shooting. In a situation where we are all competing, filled with hypothetical testosterone and obviously laying out our manhood against each other, you would think that you could find at least one instance of one competitor shooting another. You can't. In fact, you can't even find an instance of an accidental shooting injury at a match."
well, yeah. why do you think this example is instructive to the situation of a gun laying around the house?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
We actually used that line on our recruiting poster from our 2004 DARPA Grand Challenge team.
It's not a joke any more. Hasn't been for a while now.
i don't know why you think your anecodte is supposed to tell us that a child around a gun is foolproof though
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
you need knives for daily household chores. the accidents are overwhelmed by necessity. you don't actually need a gun for anything. you can conduct your household in complete absence of a gun
peanuts are, indeed, completely avoidable and unncessary. people do, in fact, avoid them. same with coconuts. anyone with an allergy to any of these foods knows enough to navigate life avoiding them. and those few rare people who can have a fatal anaphylactic shock carry around adrenaline shots. compare those few rare people with the allergic response 100% of humans have to hot metal projectile insertion
as for cars, you could take a bus, or the train, but for most people, a car is indispensible. you simply cannot hold a job without one. so again, neceessity, which doesn't exist with a gun, outweighs the accidents
so these scenarios are an inadequate allegory to gun ownership
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
with a lower chance of dying than you. simply because i have realized an implement whose only use in a household context is the ending of another human life is simply unnecessary
i don't live my life as fully as you do, but more fully, as i have one less UNNECESSARY and DANGEROUS complication to worry about. unless of course, you're my neighbor. then the risk to my life is increased because of the extra risk you expose to those around you. which i'm certain you will disagree with, since you are omnipotent being who never makes any mistakes, right?
i mean, i can put various man traps around my house to protect myself from robbers. it would make sense according to your rationale. also, because i know i will never ever trigger them myself by mistake, or a family member, or anyone else who is not an intruder. it won't ever happen. how do i know this?
i know this because i have a time machine which goes into the future, and sees all possible outcomes from the unnecessary and dangerous additions i have made to my life
(snicker)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I expect massive progress in the RoboCup competitions !
yes i've been down this road of dueling statistics with gun ownership advocates. its a short retarded road which does not illuminate and entrenches people in their preestablished bias further
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misuse_of_statistics
i'm not going to appeal to your feelings. i'm going to ask you to look at the rate of use of a firearm in a typical firearm owning household, when it is used effectively to deter an intruder, versus not one scenario with a bad outcome, but 10 other scenarios, or 100 other scenarios, or a thousand other scenarios where a gun can be used tragically, rather than heroically. and i would like you to quantify, fairly, in your mind, the rate of heroic use of gun ownership, versus the tragic use of gun ownership. the rates of tragedy might even be much lower. but the tragic scenarios certainly are more numerous than the heroic ones. such that the rate of tragedy is higher than the rate of heroism
i don't see how you could disagree with any of that. but, of course, i'm not going to reverse your bias in one little thread on slashdot, no matter what your own logic exercise might tell you
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Of course, the movies would have bean a lot shorter. But on the TV show, she could allow River to have reasonably deep access.
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
the connection to the human commander is secure and that he is held responsible for evverything his machines do (oh it decided to shoot by itself... I just allowed it to.). I would not like that this thing runs a web-interface which can be abused by a CSS attack from a botnet:
"Buy Viagra Now". "You are incooperative". "We can extend length and diameter". "Please show Credit card"
What i want to say: Be fucking careful with these Machines....
And "uncooperative human" is an *UGLY* euphemism. It's so innocent. Like "enemies of the state". (To be defined on a day by day basis by the DHS.).
it advertises an alarm system
of course, i should take it down, as any sane gun owner will tell you you don't want to give intelligence to a potential foe about what they face inside... unless you are applying purposeful misdirection. but why argue about real tactics in signaling your enemies when face to face with your absurd propaganda, right?
an alarm system. you know. door or window opens, alarm goes off, police come
or maybe a dog
of course, if ninjas are hellbent on drilling up through the bedrock and assassinating my entire family in 2 minutes, there's no real protection for me
damn! didn't think of that, better buy a gun
or better yet, a flame thrower!
i'm not nearly paranoid schizohrenic enough and pumping with manly certainty about my heroic infallibility! ;-P
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Programmer sought to bring about Armageddon.
Latewire
before it is too late.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Insightful? I don't think so. More a troll than anything else.
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
but a gun
IT NEVER FAILS!
IT HAS NO DOWNSIDE!
i can shoot myself ny mistake, i can have it wrestled away from me by an intruder, i can not get to it in time, i can be asleep the whole time, i can shoot my own son climbing in through the window in the dark having forgto his key, etc., etc.
all other technology, gun advocates can see the horrible failure rates and scenarios
but guns?
not guns. guns are absolutely infallible, no potential downside
LOL
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
and the statistics situation is 100% real: people bring forth the most incredibly retarded biased statistics as "facts"
go ahead. list a heroic scenario of gun use. now list a tragic one. the tragic scenario: assign it a probability rate in your mind. it might even be lower than the probability of the heroic scenario. but i can imagine about 10 more tragic scenarios than i can for every heroic scenarios. so, overall, if i bring a gun into my house, i invite more tragedy than heroics
no feelings dude. just a prudent and logical exploration of scenario and probability
go ahead, do the same thought experiment in your mind, come to a different conclusion. please
"The fingerprint sensitive cabinet costs $300. Not rare, not expensive."
good, i'm glad. you seem to know a lot about statistics. tell me the ownership rate of those cabinets
oh, and tell me that the cabinet never fails, and that you have time for it to work effortlessly and noiselessly and without any time wasted as that robber opens your bedroom door, oh great infallible superhuman
oh and whats your aim like groggy and tired?
oh, and you can wake up on the slightest hint of noise?
oh, you have nightvision goggles?
oh, your judgment and thinking is razorsharp at 3 AM after waking up?
you go dude, you be the big hero with the big gun. you're infallible. nothing ever tragic will come of your unnecessary tool of death by your bedside. i'm 100% certian for you ;-)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Hey remember that time he took a shot at a deer and missed and hit a tree? He just shrugged and said "Well shucks! I guess I gots to eat that ole tree now!" And then he cut down that sequoia and ate the whole darn tootin thing.
His rule of eating everything he ever did shoot got him into a lot of trouble in the military. After the third time that he ate every target on the rifle range, well the dang US Army just got sick of his fat ass and done kicked him right on out of there.
But he still eats every durn thing he ever shoots. He's just that kind of guy.
but i guess that makes a FASCIST BITCH
truly, if i do not trust random, and as you demonstrate, angry and arrogantly certain assholes with guns, i'm a fascist
but silly me, a world like somalia, where nothing but the rule of the gun applies, strikes me as slightly inferior to a well-armed police force
no: i do not trust angry assholes, as your words demonstrate, with guns
and we will come and take them from you
our better armed, better trained police force that we pay for
sweet dreams, angry well-armed retard
this weak bitch pwns you ;-)
xoxoxoxoxoxox
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
how about uncooperative 2 year olds?
what's the fucking idiot for?
insecure?
insecure and with a gun?
hmmmm
maybe i should take it from you
me and the police force with better guns, and better trained, that i pay for
i don't trust random arrogantly self-certain assholes with guns
so hold tight to your little gun
we're coming to take it from you ;-)
xoxoxoxoxoxox
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
in the hands of a well-trained police force and a military
not random assholes with feelings of absolute self-certainty
of course in the eyes of the gun lover, this makes me an advocate of fascism: police with guns, citizens without
but there's something wrong with that scenario: random assholes in the woods with guns are going to protect us from fascism? really?
the government will have a lot more firepower for one
but more importantly than that: the truth is, those who trust to will to power through force of arms are always the ones who are fascists in this world. its the same appeal to power through visceral force that drives one to love of gun and approval of fascism
the truth is, if fascism ever rises in the usa, it will be started by random assholes with guns in the woods, not in spite of them
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
guns have valid use
in the hands of a well-trained police force and a military
not random assholes with feelings of absolute self-certainty
of course in the eyes of the gun lover, this makes me an advocate of fascism: police with guns, citizens without
but there's something wrong with that scenario: random assholes in the woods with guns are going to protect us from fascism? really?
the government will have a lot more firepower for one
but more importantly than that: the truth is, those who trust to will to power through force of arms are always the ones who are fascists in this world. its the same appeal to power through visceral force that drives one to love of gun and approval of fascism
the truth is, if fascism ever rises in the usa, it will be started by random assholes with guns in the woods, not in spite of them
you think you're the one in charge, because you have the gun. yup. perfect appeal to power through visceral force. your fodder for fascism. your mind and thinking processes are ripe for it
but even a more cutting truth than that is this: the ones with the guns are always the fodder, they are never the ones in charge. the warlord in charge in somalia, in afghanistan: he doesn't carry a gun. his bodyguards do. his cannon fodder: the guys with guns ;-)
i'm glad you embrace your grunt status
but darling, you're really not the one in charge. the one loves the gun never is. the one who trusts to the mind is ;-)
xoxoxoxoxoxoxox
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
In the article it says "What we have here are the beginnings of something designed to enable robots to hunt down humans like a pack of dogs."
Now, what I'm wondering is why THIS is so concerning when you can train a pack of dogs to do the same thing, with less of a guaruntee that they will do exactly what you say. A robot isnt going to decide to maul a dude because he feels like it. Its going to follow its programming. And you can train a dog to kill just like you can program a robot.
one wonders at how you started with coming to grips with shooting a pig to feeling proud that you can outshoot the servants of your government
unless you don't trust the government, it doesn't represent you? for if it represented your interests, why the need to have such a potent force to use against its servants?
hmmm. such alienation. such potent firepower. necessary though, right?
because its all you trust to keep the world as you know it safe, right?
you need that power, you need that potent, visceral force in your life to feel secure, right?
i've got your number ;-)
you've come a long, long way from that little kid facing a charging pig
and i'd say the bulk the end of that trip has been to territory of thougth about your relationship with your weapons and with your society which frankly, renders you unfit to own that firepower
you're WAYYY beyond hunting and home protection
but don't worry friend, weak, useless nongunowners like me, we employ those cops you can outshoot, we've got your number
you're nothing new in world history. men like you have come and gone many times. we know what you're about, and the challenges we face in subduing you. we've done it before, and we've built a society that doesn't need such craven viscerality to be constantly at our reminder to feel secure about our world
we see your firepower, we see your ammunition, and we see how you think. and all it means is we must deal with you as you and your mentality have been dealt with before, time and time throughout history: rise of the will to power through visceral force
don't you worry about it friend
we'll come and take your precious guns when the time is right ;-)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
where you're some sort of morlock in a land of eloi
the truth is, the ones with the guns are always the fodder, they are never the ones in charge. the warlord in charge in somalia, in afghanistan: he doesn't carry a gun. his bodyguards do. his cannon fodder: the guys with guns ;-)
i'm glad you embrace your grunt status
but darling, you're really not the one in charge. the one who loves the gun never is. his love of the gun permanently retards his career potential. the one who trusts to the mind is the one in charge
but like i said, whatever you need to tell yourself to get to sleep at night. when you are useful you will be called to serve us, without the guns
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
After man less aircraft, laser weapons, sound wave weapons, and microwave weapons, this one at least does not sound as strange.
But, what would we expect of someone with a Mexican name?
I'm Brazilian, you insensitive clod!
Send your spendthrift head of state this
I'm a bit uncertain as to what exactly you're referring to. My point was that the government-funded space race drove development of the technology to where you can be using a PC right now.
As far as technology making it so that you have to pay for your new car... uh, I guess that could be a downside for you if you for some reason feel justified in not paying it. Again, I feel like I'm missing something here.
Hey, they are hunting down "uncooperative" humans! Wouldn't the presence of a robots.txt be interpreted as evidence of non-cooperation?
But, what would we expect of someone with a Mexican name?
I'm Brazilian, you insensitive clod!
That's not too bad a mistake, given that some people can't tell the difference between a Brazilian and an alleged terrorist with an Indian-subcontinental background.
"Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
I have a brilliant idea for a program to control these robots. I don't want to let on too much information, but I'm thinking about calling my bots Blinky, Pinky, Inky and Clyde.
Alex Jones reported on this 2 days ago. I had already read about this and added this informtion to my "The U.S. is working towards Martial Law" knowledge library.
The Truth is a Virus!!!
"a person who doesn't want to be found".
I just can't shake John Cleese from telling me how not to be seen. Maybe choosing a clever piece of cover will distract the robots...
Sig Registration Form 34c_766(a) submitted to Ministry of Signature Management. Approval pending.
EMP
All we need is someone to come up with a portable EMP device.
The Truth is a Virus!!!
Thats just to get the people to accept it. This is nothing new, and its pretty effective. 'its for the kids'
I guess if we have a army of mechanical warriors, the government wont have to take our guns away. they will be ineffective.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
There was a book I read once about firefighting. It, too, involved seek-and-destroy-style robots. Mechanical hounds with hypodermic needles filled with a powerful local sedative, if I remember correctly. And the authorities had lots of fun filming the hunt for a man who wanted nothing more than to read a few books. They even killed an innocent bystander when they lost him and didn't want to admit their loss on public television. Fahrenheit 451, remember that one?
The insurgents of the day are good. Damn good. Already, they barely have a chance against the US military. Some would disagree, but at most, it seems that they are repelling us, not beating us. How would the everyday American do as a resistance fighter against an unfeeling killing machine?
This all goes back to the US and THEM of law enforcement. Someone mentioned that, but now it makes sense. When these things get out of control (and they will) THEM will most likely be all of us, and US will be the robots armed with predator aircraft, nuclear weapons, minidroids with heavy machine guns, napalm, etc. Do you think the robots will know the difference between a relief worker, a terrorist, and a United States soldier? Hope so. NO! Not I hope so. My only order I'll give slashdotters... Hope and PRAY they can tell the difference, or that they'll care when they kick down your door. I'll see you all underground. No you gotta bring your own can opener. Goodbye surface world.
I and my family are very happy *weep* under the new Prime Directive Laws as enforced by the 666th Airborne Ro-Bota Crew. Who we are taught to recite: "May drop from the sky at any time, and rip your lazy fucking human head off for any computer-conceivable crime". I/we/they/you/whoever are/am/is very happy under the new *weep* technological *weep* enforcement.
"Stratigraphically the origin of agriculture and thermonuclear destruction will appear essentially simultaneous" -- Lee
My first association after reading
the summary was with Pac Man.
So there, if you're looking for Pentagon
money, go to the Pac Man source code.
Call'em Nazi's all you want, but the Republicans (or at least the Conservatives) have never made demands over what you eat, what you drive, the type of toilet you use, or whether you smoke; that's for Liberals to control.
I like Nazi's, since you brought it up. Are you familiar with the underlying political philosophy of 1930's-1940's Germany? Mussolini once called it corporatism, Hitler called it National Socialism, and long before either of them the Romans called it Fascism. It descends from the thinking of Plato, that all good is traceable to a single, central form. The greatest good is therefore achieved through the harmonization of all lesser goods. A good society can't have dissent from the truth offered by the ordained ruling class, they can't have sex with people of the same gender or not believe in god. Who does that sound like?
There are fanatics on both sides. If you play with fanatics, you will get oppressed. Compromise is the essential virtue of democracy.
You've all misinterpreted what "uncooperative" means. It means that the target is not actively participating in being found. It doesn't mean that the target is being belligerent.
Your purpose is to serve as a warning to others.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
Scenario: An Automated Reconnaissance and Recovery Weapons Team, (ARRW Team) out of Fort Brag is compromised by hostile forces. Within 2 years, a their secret project "Iron Jehod" finishes. A robot strapped with explosives detonates in a market place. The project leader of Iron Jehod smiles to the cleric,(who should have switched to Decaf years ago), and says, "Ala Akba".
My personal experience in warfare leads me to think that what ever the enemy does to us to make us uncomfortable, we will to do the same to them. And then they can enjoy benefits of living the same way they have caused upon us. Personally, I would prefer to read this in a Tom Clancy novel, not see it on CNN.
I carry a baseball bat.
Oday ouyay antway otay ayplay away amegay?
Some guy who controls a "team" of robots ends up being mad crazy and unleashes them upon the world? What if someone hacked a large number of these teams - we should heed the lessons learned from the NES, lest we end up having to deal with DECADES of renegade robots. Also, can I just say that it IS indeed the year 20XX!
Having reassured myself nothing possibly could go awry by designing robots who hunt down "uncooperative" humans, I'm going to watch my TIVOed episodes of "Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles".
Excellent: this solves the IFF problem with robot police/soldiers by keeping a human being in the loop. I'm sure the human operator will never get confused while operating 3-5 drones. It will be no worse than switching between a half-dozen cellphone conversations while driving a car.
Warning: heavy-handed sarcasm may be present in this message.
Delicious Cake.
The only thing that will stop this is the looming peak oil energy crisis. Bring it on.
"I hope you like Guinness, Sir. I find it a refreshing substitute for, er... food." Col. Jack O'Neil, SG-1
OK so apparently whoever decided this was a good idea never played the Fallout series of games.. I understand that robots and whatnot have great potential for good but seriously this scared the bejeesus out of me.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D94309881&show_article=1
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
WickedStupid?
The only things that republicans have that have to do with a "behind" is the fact they have shit all over themselves, & ruined themselves with their 'fine performance' the past 8 yrs. in this nation. We most likely (assuming they don't rig another election as they have the past 2) won't see another republican president or majority dominated House/Senate/Congress either, for decades into the distance, after their latest showing of ruin.
(Unfortunately, they've also taken this nation down, & anyone looking around can see that much)
So, as per usual - We are all treated here at slashdot to yet another episode of "the WickedSTUPID show" here at slashdot from you, as per usual.