What is Digg?139 Comments
- msparks789, on 05/19/2009, -3/+44And thus the end of world begins.
- asgardshill, on 05/19/2009, -3/+401. 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.
If they have to follow these, robots will make ***** warfighters. - hawkdude56, on 05/19/2009, -8/+37I, for one, welcome our new military robot overlords.
- uptwolait, on 05/19/2009, -1/+30I'm gonna say the software programmers will get sued into oblivion the first time a bus load of nuns gets smoked.
- inactive, on 05/19/2009, -1/+28TSA robot "You have 10 seconds to comply before I use deadly force!" Me "But it's only a fingernail clipper!"
- inactive, on 05/19/2009, -0/+26By the time Skynet became self-aware it had spread into millions of computer servers across the planet. Ordinary computers in office buildings, dorm rooms; everywhere. It was software; in cyberspace. There was no system core; it could not be shutdown. The attack began at 6:18 PM, just as he said it would. Judgment Day, the day the human race was almost destroyed by the weapons they'd built to protect themselves. I should have realized it was never our destiny to stop Judgment Day, it was merely to survive it, together. The Terminator knew; he tried to tell us, but I didn't want to hear it. Maybe the future has been written. I don't know; all I know is what the Terminator taught me; never stop fighting. And I never will. The battle has just begun.
- NixiePixel, on 05/19/2009, -1/+24Would you like to play a game?
- choppergirl, on 05/19/2009, -7/+28first to say it... SKYNET!
- grantHamNeck, on 05/19/2009, -1/+21FTA: "We want to do better than people, to ultimately save more lives."
I think their missing the point of a killer robot. - xobecide, on 05/19/2009, -1/+17Doubtful, it was a necessary loss in order to secure our national security.
- inactive, on 05/19/2009, -3/+18I'm sure this will work out really really well.
/s - manlyandy, on 05/19/2009, -2/+15NO DISASSEMBLE
- Hetman, on 05/19/2009, -2/+15Our elected officials cannot even make ethical choices. How can the possible create a robot that does.
- sawardracing5, on 05/19/2009, -3/+16Gee, that will put the robots aeons ahead of the military brass such as Rumsfeld who just exited stage left...
- icebane, on 05/19/2009, -0/+12How about Global Thermonuclear War.
- Catsmeat, on 05/19/2009, -0/+12Algorithms deciding between life and death. Just what the world needed. I hope I pass the criteria.
- roodammy44, on 05/19/2009, -0/+11Hey, if they're wearing a uniform and travelling in columns, surely that means they're an army?
Better put an extra "else" statement in the code...... - inactive, on 05/19/2009, -4/+15does anyone think that this is a terrible road we're going down? War is bad enough, but removing the cost of losing our own lives will make our politicians all the more eager to flex our military's might. Using robots to remotely kill people is bad enough, but allowing autonomous robots to decide who to kill and how is a plan doomed to failure.
- bstew22, on 05/19/2009, -2/+13GET TO THE CHOPPA....GIRL.
- Cyguration, on 05/19/2009, -2/+12Excellent idea.
Even if civilians are killed in the process at least we're not losing soldiers as collateral. Everyone dying and bombing each other is just stupid to begin with...at least using robots with procedural, ethical programming is one step closer to losing a little less life in the process. - Defiant001, on 05/19/2009, -2/+11And who's ethics would this be following exactly? There is a of debate as to what is right or wrong, it can be seen by reading any thread on digg. I see this as becoming a large problem.
- inactive, on 05/19/2009, -0/+94. You do not talk about robot fight club.
- roodammy44, on 05/19/2009, -0/+9What happens when both sides have robots?
When robots are fighting a war against other robots, there's going to be some serious mayhem.... - m3xican, on 05/19/2009, -3/+11Hope it won't run Vista...
- mfc5200, on 05/19/2009, -0/+8Yea but you aren't looking at the negatives. Right now, the only thing preventing powerful militaries from going around and looting/pillaging weaker countries is the crazy backlash and resentment that would exist at home.
Arguably, one of the main reasons the Iraq and Vietnam war were so disliked was because of all the casualty reports, we were at times losing dozens of soldiers a day. Now imagine you turn on the news and hear, "today we lost 10 robots". Would anyone care? Probably not.
The point being, that when we start using machines, countries will be more willing to start wars, because there will be less resentment. - dross1260, on 05/19/2009, -2/+9Professor should test on his family
- glockman69, on 05/19/2009, -0/+7It will be cool to watch on TV though....
- Jsmuli2, on 05/19/2009, -0/+7FSM's of course!
- Mike17102, on 05/19/2009, -0/+7"Please put down your weapon, you have 20 seconds to comply"
- pegothejerk, on 05/19/2009, -1/+7Somehow I fear the robots will still end up with their time off the battle field raping each other, playing poker for each others parts, listening to My Chemical Romance, and participating in oil chugging contests.
- inactive, on 05/19/2009, -1/+7only if the come in the form of sixes.
- novenator, on 05/19/2009, -1/+7Well done, beat me to the punch choppergirl
- TheMoniker, on 05/19/2009, -0/+6Hopefully, if they're well programmed. That's a pretty big 'if,' but, then again, war is generally insane to begin with...
- inactive, on 05/19/2009, -0/+6ED 209 (Robocop 3) FUNNY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9IscZMYYw0
You have 10 seconds to comply.... - dalittle, on 05/19/2009, -3/+8How about we spend money and resources on something else for a change. Is this another giant billion dollar military program in the making when people could just do this job better? We have plenty of hard problems to solve that would help actual people and not just military contractor profits.
- PopcornDave, on 05/19/2009, -0/+5Maybe not until the robots figure out they're losing 10 a day. Then things might change.
- jezsik, on 05/19/2009, -3/+8How can we have ethical machines without an ethical government?
- catxors, on 05/19/2009, -0/+5Silly. This is just some guy hyping his research project. I give it no more than a 10% chance of success.
- poip, on 05/19/2009, -1/+6an EMP would solve everything
- RogerStrong, on 05/19/2009, -1/+5This only serves to take personal responsibility out of the loop.
Now someone can launch a weapon and convince himself that someone or something else is making the ethical choice on whether to kill.
You'll be able to have a war where thousands die, and yet everyone can claim never to have harmed anyone. - Balanced, on 05/19/2009, -0/+4I'd assume it's designed such that faults mean it shuts down instead of shooting.
In a way it's kind of like how elevators are designed such that most failures will result in a stuck elevator, not a box hurtling to the ground. - stustyle, on 05/19/2009, -1/+5and so it begins. . .
- OrbitalsFear, on 05/19/2009, -2/+6What are they thinking. I am a software Engr. and I can say for sure that no one should put their lives in the hands of engineers! What happens when the ethics module has a seg fault because win32.dll has a bug and the thing takes out a school?
- badenglishihave, on 05/19/2009, -1/+5Their what is missing the point?
- askantik, on 05/19/2009, -3/+7Ethical choices? The ethical choice is to stop going to war needlessly, especially when we don't even have a clearly defined enemy. Bah.
- llopez1223, on 05/19/2009, -3/+7Forgive me for being pessimistic, BUT won't this have unforeseen consequences? Something along the lines of Skynet or I-Robot.
- aggies11, on 05/19/2009, -3/+6Sorry guys, my mistake. There was a "tiny" bug, where we accidentally reversed "civilian" with "terrorist". But no worries, it should be fixed by the next patch...
- inigomntoya, on 05/19/2009, -0/+3I would think there should be an extra 'unless' in there. But, that's just me and my 'destroy everything that moves' mindset...
- alansky, on 05/19/2009, -1/+4How can robots make ethical choices when human beings haven't learned how to do it yet? What a laugh!!!
- trevor98, on 05/19/2009, -0/+3How does a fundamental unethical implementation of technology apply the ethics of war. The only deterrence to wars of conquest is the human cost- remove that cost and military dominance will ensue. I'm just glad I'm on the robot owning side (for now).
-
Show 51 - 100 of 141 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is