Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Weaponized Robots Could Take Point In Future Military Ops

Posted by samzenpus on from the why-did-you-program-me-to-feel-pain? dept.

Lucas123 writes "This past week at Ft. Benning, weaponized robot prototypes from four robotics companies — Northrop Grumman, HDT Robotics, iRobot Corp. and QinetiQ — demonstrated their abilities to traverse rugged terrain, fire machine guns and take out pop-up targets from a distance of 150 meters. 'They're not just tools, but members of the squad. That's the goal,' said Lt. Col. Willie Smith, chief of Unmanned Ground Vehicles at Fort Benning. For example, the Northrup Grumman's CaMEL (Carry-all Mechanized Equipment Landrover) can run for 24 hours on three-and-a-half gallons of fuel, and can be equipped with a grenade launcher, an automatic weapon and anti-tank missiles. The CaMEL also can identify targets from three-and-a-half kilometers away, using a daylight telescope or thermal imaging. The robots have also demonstrated their ability to be air dropped behind enemy lines or into remote terrain."

7 of 182 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Take point? by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Funny

    I usually find LMGTFY a bit obnoxious, but in this case it is the top hit for "take point". Goodness.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  2. What could go wrong? by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 4, Funny

    I for one ... oh forget it.

    1. Re:What could go wrong? by paiute · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Since robots don't have emotions, they would not have committed those massacres.

      You mean since they don't have emotions, they won't object to committing massacres.

      --
      If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
    2. Re:What could go wrong? by RazorSharp · · Score: 4, Funny

      They're probably just programmed not to shoot white people. Kind of like the police.

      --
      "From the depths of my skeptical and rationalist soul, I ask the Lord to protect me from California touchie-feeliedom."
  3. Re:Take point? by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 4, Funny

    What does this even mean?

    Obviously, it's a reference to use of robots in sexual encounters (but not in the Japanese way). From the Urban Dictionary definition of point man:

    "When going out with a group of male friends with the intent of picking up women together, the point man is the friend that will always jump on the hand grenade, while the wing man's responsibility is to distract the cock blocker friend."

    So the robot is to be the point man, while someone else (presumably you) pick up the girl. You might need a second robot as the wing man, of course.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  4. Resentment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm sure that using robots against opponents will in now way build resentment and hatred for the United States, who is more than willing to sacrifice others in their wars, but has no taste for putting their own lives on the line for their beliefs.

    This may win the US battles, but it's going to lose the war on building any sustainable relationships with other cultures.

  5. It's the future by onyxruby · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's the future and whining about it is no different than whining about the advent of the rifle or the machine gun or the bow. Your taking the fight away from the human being through a layer of abstraction to keep your soldier alive. The layer of abstraction in this case happens to be a robot, once upon a time it was a gun or a bow.

    The people complaining about this are really no different than the Luddites that think warfare should be conduced hand to hand with swords and maces. They wont be satisfied unless their own soldiers are getting killed on the battlefield too. Technology advances whether you want it to or not. Change and human nature are the only things that stay the same.