tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post1420957532893776433..comments2024-03-18T04:09:49.450-05:00Comments on Future War Stories: FWS Topics: Military Robots and Robotic Soldiers Williamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17218428427067689631noreply@blogger.comBlogger17125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-55137115368006426782018-06-24T02:41:19.586-05:002018-06-24T02:41:19.586-05:00Oh man... from what I’ve read about your history w...Oh man... from what I’ve read about your history with robotech it mirrors mine. When I first started watching plus it was ok, but when the sdf-1 first appeared onscreen and those grav generators began to spin up it was like coming home. You need to check it out. The dub of plus is really good and not that hard to find since it was actually released here. Frontier you’ll have to watch subbed and probably illegally thanks to harmony gold tho ;) i’d skip macross 7, and if you watch zero know it’s was retconned as an “in-universe movie”. Wait to watch delta until after frontier. I can’t wait to hear what you think about themnergalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00761684712449032052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-91660867951414105392018-06-19T18:13:46.100-05:002018-06-19T18:13:46.100-05:00The sad thing is I've never seen the original ...The sad thing is I've never seen the original Japanese Macross...grew up with ROBOTECH and it was years before I realized the truth behind Harmony Gold's epic series. The only Macross work I watched and owned was Super Dimensional Fortress Macross II: Lovers Again. Based on what you said...I need to watch thisWilliamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17218428427067689631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-87993625654416232482018-06-19T01:02:55.238-05:002018-06-19T01:02:55.238-05:00Considering what a macross fan you are I’m surpris...Considering what a macross fan you are I’m surprised you missed macross plus. One of the story arcs is about the development of an autonomous drone fighter. These fighters are seen again as slaves to a recon variant plane in the macross frontier series, where they seem to fill the role of scouts, and of interceptors for things manned pilots just can’t dogfight.<br /><br />While in macross plus discussion time is given to the ethical concerns of drones (this show being from 1994 iirc) by the macross frontier series of this past decade they’ve just become another tool integrated into the sms - the military contractors the show revolves around.nergalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00761684712449032052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-82794787525671427492018-03-16T19:33:52.260-05:002018-03-16T19:33:52.260-05:00William, do you ever read a sci-fi book called Tin...William, do you ever read a sci-fi book called Tin Men by Christopher Golden? Because in the book, soldiers control robots via neurotechnology to achieve this. <br />I'm not sure what you think of soldiers remotely control robots through neuroscience or motion-based technology, but that concept of people controlling robots indirectly seem pretty interesting to me . . . in terms of combat and support operations, although I do like people controlling robots through motion-based technology. So what do you think of it Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-10032100492953140372017-11-16T20:52:23.712-06:002017-11-16T20:52:23.712-06:00Robots GK-Robots could communicate with each other...<a href="http://www.computergk.com/category/robots/" rel="nofollow">Robots GK-</a>Robots could communicate with each other;robots general knowledge (GK) is very excellent. Robots might facilitate to get over harm or closure through necessary operations together with changes of batteries or renewal of different kinds of energy supply;Robots might do the manufacture of other robots from exploring, collecting, transporting and process raw materials to collecting the ultimate robots.<br />computergk.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05478992560994995908noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-84004941834445929792017-07-24T12:19:06.666-05:002017-07-24T12:19:06.666-05:00This was an awesome article! Kudos!! You have my r...This was an awesome article! Kudos!! You have my respects.Zardozhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01587580559978885795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-14206537948347442332016-10-22T13:37:59.493-05:002016-10-22T13:37:59.493-05:00As an interesting aside, regarding civilization an...As an interesting aside, regarding civilization and the ability to turn our human equivalent of "Asimov's Laws" on and off: <br /><br />We find that it's very difficult for human beings to change their programming, and convert from civilians to soldiers: war changes humans and tends to break us psychologically; many, perhaps most, soldiers have a difficult time abandoning civilization and doing horrible things in the name of war, and then re-integrating back into civilization afterward - the experience is traumatic. That is a human part of warfare, and perhaps it is one which keeps warfare from being even worse than it already is... or, perhaps, it is one that drives warfare into an even darker direction than it needs to be. <br /><br />I wonder how that dynamic would change when it comes to robots, who could basically switch from civilization to barbarism and back with a simple push of a button? That, perhaps, is the biggest question and danger involving trust between human beings and robots: human programming is a life-long, complicated, and delicate yet resilient thing that takes a long time and a lot of trouble to alter; a robot's personality, for better and for worse, is easily changed on the fly and instantly with a few keystrokes, or with a change of intangible variables. Robots introduce a different emotional dynamic into wars, in any event: on one hand, robots do not suffer the emotional and psychological trauma that the savagery and horror of war produces in human soldiers, and robots lack the sort of inhibition against that sort of savagery and horror that civilized humans have been programmed with; on the other hand, robots also lack the complicated instincts and lines of thinking that drive some human soldiers into raping, looting, and sadism against their victims, or the insights into human psychology that make it possible and advantageous for human soldiers to inflict psychological horrors onto their enemies to break their will to fight. <br /><br />At the risk of sounding like one of the androids from the "Alien" film series admiring the xenomorphs, there is a certain purity, simplicity, and efficiency to a combat robot's identify-point-click-and-repeat-until-ordered-to-stand-down mentality which human soldiers will, for better or worse, will lack for as long as we remain human.Y.Whateleynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-16773515445997884822016-10-22T13:28:06.724-05:002016-10-22T13:28:06.724-05:00Great article! I've just gotten myself starte...Great article! I've just gotten myself started on a 1/72 scale model kit-bashing project that somehow turned itself into a "twenty minutes into the future" cyberpunk world-building exercise, and researching the role of those "mule" robots in near-future combat brought me here.<br /><br />Some thoughts...<br /><br /><br />Re: Robots in science fiction - I notice that you didn't mention 1965's "Dune" as an example. Robots and computers generally do not appear in the series, but in its background, the "Butlerian Jihad" resulted from some undescribed horror involving thinking machines and their soul-crushing influence on humanity, resulting in humans driving all robots and computers out of their culture, and writing a commandment against making machines in the image of human minds into their interplanetary synthetic religion. It seems that selective breeding, specialized training, surgery, and genetic engineering of human equivalents to dedicated computers and robots took the place of thinking machines in that setting, and in a way humans took over for their robot masters, replacing them as biological computers and robots. It's not a big omission, but it is an interesting alternative take on the idea.<br /><br />Re: Asimov's Laws - Asimov's Laws for robots are comparable to a sort of Ten Commandments and similar ethical constructs for human beings, as a way of maintaining civilization during times of peace: we expect human beings not to kill each other, steal things, do harm to each other or to themselves, and so on under normal circumstances. War, however, is a temporary suspension of civilization under what we hope are extraordinary circumstances, and with that suspension of civilization comes the expectation that combatants will suspend normal ethics, and kill each other, take territory and material from enemies, and harm, threaten, intimidate, and terrorize potential threats into submission or inability to act. Similarly, we could not expect robots to adhere to Asimov's Laws under the same circumstances: robots in combat are not operating under civilized conditions, and are not bound by the same civilized laws that civilian robots would operate under. <br /><br />Re: "...unlike a human, which side an robot is on is all a matter of programming..." - I would have to disagree: which side a human is on is all a matter of programming, as well. One need not dig very deeply into history to see examples of that at work, such as the "free-booter" mercenary armies which historically fought on all sides of their wars, depending on who paid the highest price, and on militant religious orders dedicated to fighting under their given religious banners against other religions or enemies, and of course the relatively recent developments of nationalist armies and armies formed under the banners of various ideological "-isms": whether the programming involves money, xenophobia, nationality, race, religion, ideology, or even something as arbitrary as gang colors or team uniforms or shirts-vs-skins, the side that a human takes is definitely a matter of some form of programming - and in fact, a frighteningly basic, primitive, and easy-to-access form of programming, at that!<br /><br /><br />In any case, a very well thought-out article, and I enjoyed reading it, and look forward to exploring the rest of this site!Y.Whateleynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-4250633442513134832016-06-27T23:23:15.260-05:002016-06-27T23:23:15.260-05:00But therein lies the question of what point does a...But therein lies the question of what point does a humanoid, bipedal mecha have any distinct advantage over power armor and ultimately if a mecha at such a scale is even needed over power armor.<br /><br />Though personally a mecha with a large enough cockpit won't be able to go into a building without demolishing it while power armor will. There lies an element to which combined arms tactics would theoretically take hold if properly deployed and managed. But that's just me.Sabersonichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11304850400062201271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-18350201099607399192016-06-27T17:15:46.653-05:002016-06-27T17:15:46.653-05:00Urban combat mechs have been seen in Ghost in the ...Urban combat mechs have been seen in Ghost in the Shell with the Fuchikoma and the VOTOM armor. Williamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17218428427067689631noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-66586452597511832122016-06-27T12:28:41.194-05:002016-06-27T12:28:41.194-05:00Slightly off topic, but your view of the "mec...Slightly off topic, but your view of the "mech" is very specific. That's the one big falacy I often hear about "con mech" arguments, that mechs are too big for open warfare. That is true, but as fws has posted in the past there are different sizes and classes of mechs. Urban mechs seem to be very tactical, and very probably better then tanks or other support vehicles In the very common urban combatJarom Swensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08356051701090723881noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-20330777331001384562016-06-21T22:18:01.647-05:002016-06-21T22:18:01.647-05:00A very interesting & well thought out article ...A very interesting & well thought out article William, as per usual :)<br /><br />IMHO opinion, Sci-fi is just a precursor to reality,it's just the time period to fruition that's uncertain. So although I'm not in favour of robotic/A.I. warfare becoming the norm, I see it as an inevitable outcome due to the technological path we have chosen....militarily.<br /><br />The only future tech that I don't think will ever be feasible to create (albeit awesome for fellow nerds to imagine happening) will be Mech's. Not because of the perceived difficulty to build them, but because they'll present themselves as a huge target on the battlefield & be prohibitively expensive to make, maintain & transport. We all remember how Hitlers love of huge battle pieces turned out don't we.<br /><br />Cheers :)Mr Papafakishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05449586265828153638noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-78058238894940954962016-06-21T04:13:18.929-05:002016-06-21T04:13:18.929-05:00A long time ago, I heard a rather profound stateme...A long time ago, I heard a rather profound statement. I don’t know who said it, but it fits the subject.<br /><br />“When robots fight wars, it won’t be war; I don’t know what it will be, but it won’t be war.”<br /><br />War is a political endeavor. It begins with a political decision, and ends with political accommodations. If war becomes too mechanized, the nation’s citizenry might see it as an athletic sport, and fail to force their political leaders for a resolution until it’s too late. <br /><br />One example of this is Desert Shield/Desert Storm. We all saw the scud get blow out of the sky by a patriot missile, (still don’t know if its warhead was destroyed,) and “The Luckiest Man In Iraq,” (who probably was killed by the concussion.) Consider this on a much larger scale, and robots being the only casualties. <br /><br />It would be a wonderful show. Nations’ technical might being brought to bear against each other until on side gets an edge, and thinks it could end the war quicker if they turned their weapons against civilians. There are historical examples of this, and it always makes the war longer and bloodier. <br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15463753036970838320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-29081228565352142016-06-21T03:43:02.293-05:002016-06-21T03:43:02.293-05:00Reply was to big..... again....
As for the questi...Reply was to big..... again....<br /><br />As for the question of if drones make reduce or escalate conflict, lately I am of the optinion that drones make securing objectives easier since in days past when one wanted to take out a target it required very skilled boots on the ground. With a drone, it would be easier to just aim the PIPer at a target and pulling a trigger as the film Drones ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drones_(2013_film) ) had demonstrated. Though its use could actually determine if drones would have a positive or negative impact as said film has shown. Of course, drone operators can have PTSD as well as the film "Good Kill" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Kill ) had demonstrated. Heck, this entire blogpost reminded me of those two films. Though now that I think of it, is it a good idea to make autonomous weapon platforms "dumb"? As the film Screamers ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Screamers_%281995_film%29 ) had shown, they could be just as muderous as a fully sapient mind simply because they're too limited to know that what they're doing is completley wrong. It would probalby be safer to make non-combat "autonomous support platforms" the AI and the combat drones human operated in which the latter would have a hard wired "kill command" if it's hacked in any way that kills the motherboard and renders it absolutely useless as a drone in the field until it's repaired at a specialized back in the homefront. <br /><br />Oh, as for that whole "robots will bring an end to human-on-human warfare", I'm reminded of how during the Cold War nuclear weapons were suppose to "end warfare as we know it". Yet, the Korean War was fought very conventionally even with both sides of the Iron Curtain having access to said nuclear weapons. The same could be said of the Maxim machinegun in that it would have made so many casualties that people would not want to wage war because of such carnage, and yet we got World War I. It is my belief that autonomous weapon platforms would not only make optaining mission objectives easier, but that warfare would simply be different. Wars will still be fought and boots will have to be on the ground to hold that territory, but it would not mean that humans would be absent from those battlefields. Rather it'll be less crowded over a much larger expanse of territory since said soldiers are able to do much more with less.<br /><br />Personally, I'm surprised that you didn't mention Virus ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus_(1999_film) ). Granted, it was less "human created" and more "alien invasion", but I think it has a certain Robot Apocalypse air to it.Sabersonichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11304850400062201271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-43328224893030095362016-06-21T03:42:29.536-05:002016-06-21T03:42:29.536-05:00An interesting blog entry there William, and espec...An interesting blog entry there William, and especially the impact of drones on warfare and the military mindset. I have heard of stories about soldiers being emotionally attached to such drones and even offering funerals when said drone is damaged beyond repair. I'm not sure what the psychology root would be that would cause a soldier to emathize with a machine through either combat stress or a need for companionship, but I think that the chances are likely that the type of humans that would absolutely NOT want said "autonomous weapon platforms" to be mistreated would be the common infantryman or similar frontline military personnel, especially if the point is hammered that the damage done to said robot could have easily been said personnel. <br /><br />Anyway, on the subject of Sentry Guns ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5YftEAbmMQ ), I think someone with enough genre savy and intelligence would program into said Sentry Guns two rather important programs: IFF and Facial Recognition. IFF, similar to the "Red Asset" of the Robocop Reboot, would help lessen the chance of friendly fire if and when a soldier returns to base when the sentry gun's watch is activated (and would probably in violation of a new military code in which approaching a base during the sentry gun rotation is a bad idea for any number of reasons) so they wouldn't be immediately shot up. As for facial recognition, well I think that a smart enough insurgent would realize the whole IFF tag thing and would probably try to steal said IFF tag to bypass the sentry's targeting software. However, the facial recognition software would be fed from a central computer or a computer network deep within said base would have said soldier's face on file with that particular IFF tag. If there's a discreptency between the face and the tag, an alarm is sounded that more or less wakes everyone up, while warning the individual to not approach any closer until authorized military personnel arrive to arrest them. If they resist in any way or if there's a kill command, pop goes the insurgent. Though I'm pretty sure that such a system would be a gross violation of Asimov's First Rule of Robotics, but then again this would be equally as dumb as contemporary drone platforms.Sabersonichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11304850400062201271noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-12481615098368281622016-06-21T01:22:00.730-05:002016-06-21T01:22:00.730-05:00An excellent article about the future of automated...An excellent article about the future of automated machines in the military. The civilian world is already beginning to feel and become aware of the effects of automation and put us in quite the existential crisis. Its impact on the military would be unimaginable; especially considering the link between war, humanity and the human experience.<br /><br />But I am unsure if any form of Asimov's Three Laws would be possible to implement. As the youtube channel Computephile pointed out in their video addressing it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PKx3kS7f4A<br /><br />BTW thanks for including that section on Forerunner Prometheans, I agree with what you said about the Knights between Halo 4 and 5 and how they really needed the make over. Although gameplay aside I still logically think they are still too weak and inept at tactical combat to be worthy of being Forerunner war machines. (a common thing about machine warriors in sci-fi in general)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09681852969821394436noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-726484495782035142.post-46376327832563571402016-06-21T00:53:52.588-05:002016-06-21T00:53:52.588-05:00Near future Roles for Military Robots.
First Auto...Near future Roles for Military Robots. <br />First Autonomous, Operating with a minimum of Human input. <br />Air:<br />ISR<br />Strike<br />Logistics<br />Refueling<br /><br />I know most would say here Air superiority, however At this point ( from now till 2030) The ability to place that much autonomy into a robot's CPU is still limited and unpopular. additionally to date the most popular Drones in service are comparative feather weights incapable of supersonic flight. Although some larger Supersonic drones have been tested they have as yet to enter service or production. Even when heavier more capable drones have come on line they are limited to those 4 missions, ISR, Strike and Logistics and now Refueling. <br /><br />Unmanned Operating as a remote platform for humans <br />ISR<br />Patrol<br />Strike<br />Logistics<br />Again the same over all missions from lighter platforms although these being smaller units can now be tasked directly to onsite forces like Naval ships and Infantry<br /><br />Second Ground. <br />Autonomous:<br />Escort<br />Logistics <br />ISR<br />For Escort See the Ripsaw or The Crusher for a platform meant to serve APC's IFV's and Convoys like how Destroyers and frigates serve a Carrier. They are meant to supplement it's fire power. Although I list them as Autonomous It's likely that they would function in both remote and autonomous modes. For the second role Self driving convoys and lesser logistics vehicles operating without personal is a goal, getting supplies from point A to Point C with out having lost anyone at the ambush of Point B is a win. <br />Remote operated or semi autonomous<br />On the smaller scale Infantry and special mission platforms<br />EOD<br />Escort <br />Scout<br />Fire support<br />Perimeter security<br />Logistics <br />Engineering<br />EOD is well established by send a human to deal with an explosive device when a robot is easier to repair or dispose of. Escort Again albeit at a smaller size to augment infantry. Again see the Crusher concept from The US army FCS program. Scouting is done all the time Smaller ground drones can go into buildings and behind enemy cover to see what's happening and even attack. Fire support is a bit more interesting, a few years back the USMC was experimenting with a Unmanned Mortar system Dragon Fire II That if implemented would have offered a 120mm mortar that could have been set and forgot there was also the FCS NLOS LS that was a VLS container that could have been set up and called on for fire missions. <br />Perimeter Security has the XM7 spider mine system that operates on an Operator Input, Containerized weapons stations that are the classic Auto turret video game trope become reality. <br />And finally Logistics LS3 from Boston robotics or Lockheed Martin's MUTT or the Milrem THeMIS which is basically a equipment rack with tracks.<br />And As to engineering well remote Dozers and the like should be nothing new.<br /> <br />LCONhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04841691624835390231noreply@blogger.com