Google tests driverless car

Scroll to see replies

And you'd also realise that the government isn't infallible and can and does make fairly bad decisions quite regularly. Eg. the selling of our gold, deregulation of banks, allowing the takeover of Cadbury's by Kraft Foods (potentially AstraZeneca as well), privatisation of the energy sector and so on.

Sometimes the decisions they make in the name of public interest wont actually benefit the public at all. This is likely to be another one of those decisions.

Lol. Going from small missteps to an almost Orwellian notion of selling of citizens data is just ridiculous.

Reply 81

Mr.Obsessed

Original post by Fullofsurprises

They claim that, as do the other Silicon Giants. Yet the NSA documents leaked by Snowden repeatedly show them eagerly and actively co-operating.

It isn't surprising as Google are also working on numerous US government projects, including robotic warfare.

B.S

To live, is to advance.
We (silicon-based companies) aren't going to stop developing the world because of people objecting to idiotic conspiracies like you are.

Reply 82

Fullofsurprises

Original post by Mr.Obsessed

B.S

To live, is to advance.
We (silicon-based companies) aren't going to stop developing the world because of people objecting to idiotic conspiracies like you are.

If the primary aim is widening the gap between the already-super-rich and the working poor and not much else, then it isn't 'advancing'.

I'm not quite sure what you are calling 'BS' though, are you saying it's BS that Google are developing robotic warfare? They are.

Reply 83

Psyk

Original post by Fullofsurprises

The gap between the rich and poor is widening, but in general the poor across the world are getting richer too. Just not by as much as the people who are already rich.

I don't think robotic warfare is fundamentally a bad thing. Depends how they are used. If two countries go to war and send robots to fight each other, isn't that better than sending people to kill each other?

Reply 84

Fullofsurprises

Original post by Psyk

If the gap grows more extreme, social unrest will rise and as the rich become more and more distant from the rest and more and more powerful, they will engineer society so that only their interests are met. This is increasingly true already - our tax system has effectively been redesigned in the last 25-30 years to prevent the wealthiest from having to pay tax at all.

Robot soldiers will be killing people first and foremost. Drones already are and they have demonstrated that the brutality and callousness of the United States policy towards civilians in Afghanistan and Pakistan can be conducted with less criticism of public policy. Hence the rush to robots.

Reply 85

miser

Original post by Fullofsurprises

Just wanted to chime in with this and say this is absolutely true already and has been for some time. Particularly in the US. The interests of the wealthy determine policy, not popular opinion. It's a bit of a sham to put a democratic mask on an oligarchic system.

Reply 86

ClickItBack

Original post by Fullofsurprises

Why do you think unrest will increase if the average person sees a year on year increase in their living standards and prosperity? Do you not think there would be greater unrest if there was stagnation or a fall in living standards, even with a narrower distribution of wealth? (hint: history supports the latter hypothesis, not the former).

I would say your view on why the US is moving towards robot warfare is the most cynical stance possible, and doesn't take into account other reasons why they are interested in pursuing it (operational ability, efficiency, lower casualties on their own side, etc). That's not to say that being able to conduct operations with less media attention is not a motivating factor, but I think it's hardly the only - or even the main - one.