What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
All-time Low Fares for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up. Nifty all-airline calendar identifies absolute cheapest dates to fly.
72 Comments
- woodyex1, on 06/16/2009, -2/+27SKYNET commeth
- inactive, on 06/16/2009, -0/+19I wonder what the top-secret stuff looks like.
- coelomate, on 06/16/2009, -0/+16Yeah, we might be afraid of terrorism and terrorists - but imagine being in their shoes. We have unmanned killing machines that can fly for what, 40 hours, with half a dozen missiles, being piloted by some guy in a mountain halfway around the world. Death from above much? It's literally the scariest thing I can imagine. Nukes might be bigger, but the massive and lasting collateral damage actually has served for 6 decades now to minimize their use. These things are the truly terrifying future of war.
- Nick217, on 06/16/2009, -2/+17I want to take the gladiator with me on black friday.
- socivitus, on 06/16/2009, -7/+20As long as machines are doing the dirty work and our boys are safe, I'm happy.
- RatatRatR, on 06/16/2009, -2/+14"With public disapproval of any armed conflict on the rise, the DoD is under heavy pressure to remove the human element from the equation in order to reduce American casualties."
Well, guys, you're... sort of half-getting it. - Frostek, on 06/16/2009, -2/+13These might be useful in the event of a zombie uprising.
- MrSkills, on 06/16/2009, -1/+10Isn't a nuclear missile a reasonably effective unmanned killing machine?
- Raptor007, on 06/16/2009, -1/+9Holy ridiculous font size, Batman!
- Skuzzlbut, on 06/16/2009, -2/+10The Gladiator is the most underrated of them all. Everyone talks so much about the aerial weapons, but the Gladiator can straight-up MOW through entire masses of people. Designed to run through nuclear fallout, carries "mini-missiles" and soon-to-be 50 cal guns.
- lewystud, on 06/16/2009, -0/+8The X47-B is the most revolutionary plane in at least 10 years
- inactive, on 06/16/2009, -2/+9S-S-S-S-Server breaker
- aforsberg, on 06/16/2009, -0/+7Let me know when it has mini-nukes and dispenses rad-away.
- woodyex1, on 06/16/2009, -0/+7While I do see your point, I just wanted to add that war is supposed to be terrifying. I feel that the real threat of these machines is that they will instill fear into potential enemies. And if fear itself doesn't slow our enemy the amount of of rounds placed down range by these machines should.
- woodyex1, on 06/16/2009, -0/+6Mirror: http://rorr.im/digg.com/security/12_of_america_s_d ...
- fragMasterFlash, on 06/16/2009, -0/+5There's a robot for that, too!
- opitica, on 06/17/2009, -0/+5this is probably why we'll never take up arms against our own government in this day and age. if it every got too out of hand we would just become target practice.
- defwheezer, on 06/16/2009, -4/+8Oh boy- remote control killing machines... and w/out the danger of Americans getting killed or captured, wars will be so much easier to justify to the public.
btw- I suppose this (drone race) means the next multi-billion $$ military boondoggle will be a "Drone Shield" to protect the US/allies from inevitable 'homeland' attack from hostile drones. - pinchduck, on 06/16/2009, -0/+4I have heard that machines like these sabotage our "hearts & minds" efforts because they are so dehumanized & terrifying. OTOH, war shouldn't be a P.R. exercise & it shouldn't be a game of Civilization. It should be break the other guy's ability to wage war, then get the hell out. These things could be perfect for that. Those brutal tactics, while not winning us many friends, would keep the cost of war down, too. Suppose we had quit Iraq after a couple of months, with a stern "and don't screw with us again" message. Maybe things would be worse, maybe they would be better, but they would certainly be cheaper. It would have also sent a clear message to Ahmadinijad as well.
- gflc, on 06/17/2009, -1/+5It is unbelievable! We are in the 21st century and some "Americans" only think about
destruction, war, killing, shooting, etc.
There is even a show called "Future Weapons" (http://dsc.discovery.com/tv/future-weapons/future- ...
This is brain wash! - rodimusrex, on 06/16/2009, -2/+6I'm not impressed. I think we need to miniaturize. Small buglike drones that can land on a dictator's neck, fly up its nose and explode. And farther into the future, smart dust that can pass barriers in the lungs and mucous membranes to kill specific targets. Pair this with sensor and detector drones. Then you can simply assassinate anyone you want anytime.
- Rikkochet, on 06/16/2009, -1/+5That's assuming 18th Century warfare where enemies are polite and line up to be driven over. This ain't C&C: while the Gladiator is a badass piece of equipment, it's really only effective at taking out fortifications. Infantry will just scatter if they see it before it rains death.
- woodyex1, on 06/16/2009, -0/+4Ha!! Agreed and dugg. But who would pick the delicious strawberries that I am eating? Many unskilled members of the work force would scoff at doing such a task.
- lewystud, on 06/16/2009, -2/+5they actually cut down on civilian casualties because they (help) to remove pilot error
- DESTROYER2118, on 06/16/2009, -2/+5Name 2 examples.
- borez, on 06/16/2009, -1/+4Autonomous means that it does not require a handler, it's taking the human element out of the decision making process, it's an insane concept when it comes to armed machinery.
- Ymeg, on 06/16/2009, -1/+4Because you know absolutely everything the US military is developing, right?
- pinchduck, on 06/16/2009, -1/+4Only if the code is not bug free, the programmers and handlers are psychologically stable, and Quality Control goes to the best qualified candidate instead of the lowest cost bidder.
Hrm...maybe you have a point. - woodyex1, on 06/16/2009, -0/+3If only apple would make an app for that.....
- woodyex1, on 06/16/2009, -1/+3Yes, but I do think that a nuke would cause a little more negative attention than say the new stealth predator.
- dsfjvhbd, on 06/17/2009, -0/+2Iran, just now
Zimbabwe a few years ago
and so on
Would we like to see these, initially democratically elected, presidents in command of an army of armed robots?
What happened anywhere can happen everywhere. - cheddaro, on 06/16/2009, -1/+3If I were the leader of one of the large south american drug cartels, I sure would be interested in capturing one of these, or the people who know how to make them.
Imagine the ***** storm a UAV loaded with 3000LBS of coke and some air-to-air missiles could cause? I imagine that scenario (maybe minus the missiles) is coming to a border town near you soon enough. - Bloodweaver, on 06/17/2009, -0/+2Autonomous does not mean that it makes its own missions or programs itself. It autonomously follows the instructions it is given and makes its own choices from the list of choices that it is given. It follows all of the limits, or lack of them, that its human designers programmed. It is not a mindless killing machine in the respect that its objective and possible choices are directly given to it and limited by a human.
- spoon088, on 06/17/2009, -3/+5Yeah, worst idea ever. War is supposed to be terrible, that's how we remind ourselves of why we shouldn't wage war. All this does is marginalize human life for those that don't have access to unmanned murder machines.
- cl2yp71c, on 06/16/2009, -2/+4You're a tad out of touch with reality, aren't you?
- inactive, on 06/30/2009, -0/+1What if the enemy had robots as well, I bet the americans wouldn't bother unless they can kill some actual non Christians.
- mattofasia, on 06/18/2009, -0/+1In other stupid observations... North Korea? 14 million in the army? The robots are gonna eat you, without any messy radiation afterwards.
- mattofasia, on 06/18/2009, -0/+1on another stupid note from myself, I think the protector boat bots would do wonders for the merchant fleets of the world. I would invest in that.
- fragMasterFlash, on 06/16/2009, -3/+4If the US has such great robotic capabilities how come we cannot secure our borders? I know, lets get the robots to build us a gynormus fence along the border.
- mattofasia, on 06/18/2009, -0/+1I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords... Need some polishing, sir? It appears we will need to suck up for our food in the dark future! Nice robot...
- rodimusrex, on 06/16/2009, -0/+1And you don't give them the ability to self replicate...that would be collosally stupid
- tgc1, on 06/16/2009, -0/+1Unless it moves very, VERY quickly. Which I doubt it does, it will more than likely be taken out by a cheap RPG that costs 2 dollars in the countries that its deployed in. That plus it's got to run out of ammo some time.
- JCEEZ, on 06/16/2009, -2/+3T-1000
- inactive, on 06/30/2009, -0/+1swarms of miniature hunter seeker helicopters?
- inactive, on 06/17/2009, -4/+5Kill a Muslim for Jesus!
- Phaedryn, on 06/16/2009, -2/+3Actually, he isn't that far off. Weapons systems capable of being dispersed amongst a large population yet only killing specific individuals is on the short list of desired technologies.
Chemical, biological (the Human Genome Project isn't used for purely benign purposes you know), and physical, the technology is being worked on in many fields.
Expect a deployable version in a decade to two at the latest. - mrpunman, on 06/17/2009, -0/+1So it begins..
****** shotgun* - ncgmac, on 06/17/2009, -0/+1See, that's the point. Wait for 3 guys who can't aim to jump up with their RPGs aimed at the gladiator. Then three U.S. Marines walk out from behind a wall and take them out with their pistols and bullets that cost pennies on the dollar.
- otterp, on 06/23/2009, -0/+1Horrible
- kd1s, on 06/17/2009, -0/+1No *****. I know we in the geek community loved the DARPA Grand and Urban Challenges but did we think they were going to use the technologies for peaceful purposes?
-
Show 51 - 73 of 73 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is