Turn on thread page Beta

Holy **** - Killer robots in widespread use watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    Emotionally I'd argue it could become on par with it being like a computer game.
    Physically I'd argue that it's different because the soldiers life isn't in danger.

    I think these two points are the most important.


    If only we have them (and have more of them), would we be more up for going to war with other countries in the middle east?

    Yes, there is no larger impact on public opinion than coffins draped in falgs. If not for the body count, the Vietnam war would have lasted a lot longer, and governments with questionable agendas would find themselves with a free reign to pursue interests at the expense of innocent lives which their population is completely detatched.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    I think these two points are the most important.





    Yes, there is no larger impact on public opinion than coffins draped in falgs. If not for the body count, the Vietnam war would have lasted a lot longer, and governments with questionable agendas would find themselves with a free reign to pursue interests at the expense of innocent lives which their population is completely detatched.
    Long term also what do you think would happen?
    Robot police officers can't be a good thing...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Just think, this is what will be on the battlefield in years to come!



    It's truly frightening.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    When you can't even trust robots, who can you trust?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aeolus)
    I think these two points are the most important.





    Yes, there is no larger impact on public opinion than coffins draped in falgs. If not for the body count, the Vietnam war would have lasted a lot longer, and governments with questionable agendas would find themselves with a free reign to pursue interests at the expense of innocent lives which their population is completely detatched.
    There is no moral difference - a human life has been ended by the actions of another human.

    "Fairness" is irrelevant. It does not matter at all whether the soldiers life in danger. War isn't about being fair. Otherwise you'd argue there were ethical issues in using ground attack aircraft. Being physically removed is a red herring.

    What on earth do the emotions of the killer have to do with what is essentially state-licensed murder? Does the killer having an adrenaline rush somehow change the fact that one person murdered another ?

    No it doesn't. Morally - nothing has changed. I do not see any difference because morally, there isn't. Whether or not a soldier has to put their life in danger whilst executing someone else has no ramifications for the act of murder itself. Murder is murder. For you to claim that not being physically present, and not being subjected to heightened emotions at the time of the murder - to carry some form of meaning - is bizarre.

    It would be more accurate to think of soldiers are state-licenced brains dedicated to the killing of humans. What mechanism is used to achieve this - long range artillery (physically removed, emotionally detached as well here), sniper rifles, attack aircraft, nuclear bombs or just knives - doesn't matter. Soldiers are brains that have been indoctrinated to think in a certain style. Because of their particular manner of thinking - they are soldiers. It is not about the weapons wielded.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lust of a Gardener)
    Just think, this is what will be on the battlefield in years to come!



    It's truly frightening.
    I also googled "killer robots".
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    I want one so I can programme it to kill Kerry Katona and Peaches Geldof :ta:
    I second that.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    I clicked on this thread hoping for early cylons
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    They're mostly used for bomb disposal on the ground. UAV's like the MQ-1 are in widespread use because they are cheaper and less risky than using a multirole/strike fighter. Were still a looooooooong way away from fully autonomous killing machines, not because the technology doesnt exists, but because of morals. If a civilian is killed who is to blame?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RyanT)
    There is no moral difference - a human life has been ended by the actions of another human.

    "Fairness" is irrelevant. It does not matter at all whether the soldiers life in danger. War isn't about being fair. Otherwise you'd argue there were ethical issues in using ground attack aircraft. Being physically removed is a red herring.

    What on earth do the emotions of the killer have to do with what is essentially state-licensed murder? Does the killer having an adrenaline rush somehow change the fact that one person murdered another ?

    No it doesn't. Morally - nothing has changed. I do not see any difference because morally, there isn't. Whether or not a soldier has to put their life in danger whilst executing someone else has no ramifications for the act of murder itself. Murder is murder. For you to claim that not being physically present, and not being subjected to heightened emotions at the time of the murder - to carry some form of meaning - is bizarre.

    It would be more accurate to think of soldiers are state-licenced brains dedicated to the killing of humans. What mechanism is used to achieve this - long range artillery (physically removed, emotionally detached as well here), sniper rifles, attack aircraft, nuclear bombs or just knives - doesn't matter. Soldiers are brains that have been indoctrinated to think in a certain style. Because of their particular manner of thinking - they are soldiers. It is not about the weapons wielded.
    The psychological differences would be relatively large. If the soldiers out there didn't have any problems, I fear many of that state wouldn't have so many issues with it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Planto)
    I also googled "killer robots".
    Yeah, that one is one of the newer models.

    Apparently it has a killing power of 4.2 Courics.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RyanT)
    There is no moral difference - a human life has been ended by the actions of another human.
    "Fairness" is irrelevant. It does not matter at all whether the soldiers life in danger. War isn't about being fair. Otherwise you'd argue there were ethical issues in using ground attack aircraft. Being physically removed is a red herring.
    Fair doesn't come into it. Im talking about someone who's job it is to kill, being emotionally removed from the battlefield.

    War becomes a game to those who are technically superior.

    And of course there are ethical issues in using attack aircraft. :lolwut:

    What on earth do the emotions of the killer have to do with what is essentially state-licensed murder? Does the killer having an adrenaline rush somehow change the fact that one person murdered another ?
    :facepalm2: Now you are just being childish. Are you honestly trying to say that there is no phsycological difference between a robot and a soldier?

    I hope not. :rolleyes:

    No it doesn't. Morally - nothing has changed. I do not see any difference because morally, there isn't. Whether or not a soldier has to put their life in danger whilst executing someone else has no ramifications for the act of murder itself. Murder is murder. For you to claim that not being physically present, and not being subjected to heightened emotions at the time of the murder - to carry some form of meaning - is bizarre.

    Firstly, i know you keep using the term murder for dramatic effect. But it is rather immature and only serves to detract from your argument. :yy:

    Again, i am interested as to whether you seriously think, there is no physcological difference between killing directly and killing indirectly. If so, then i would say that is bizarre.

    It would be more accurate to think of soldiers are state-licenced brains dedicated to the killing of humans.
    No, im not sure what planet you think you are living on, but soldiers are undeniably human beings. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by there's too much love)
    The psychological differences would be relatively large. If the soldiers out there didn't have any problems, I fear many of that state wouldn't have so many issues with it.
    So you're saying more human beings should die and be aimed, specifically from the "stronger" side - just so that people care?

    I think that says more about a disease in politics rather then being a moral analysis of the use of robotics. In which case you should be rallying against a political problem - not a method to protect soldiers from war.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RyanT)
    So you're saying more human beings should die and be aimed, specifically from the "stronger" side - just so that people care?

    I think that says more about a disease in politics rather then being a moral analysis of the use of robotics. In which case you should be rallying against a political problem - not a method to protect soldiers from war.
    Actually my view is less people will die if we don't have robots on the battle field with regards to our places of conflict.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Predator missile ready for deployment
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Democracy)
    I want one so I can programme it to kill Kerry Katona and Peaches Geldof :ta:
    you forgot amy winehouse
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    "It's like a video game [with] the ability to kill. It's like ... freaking cool."
    I WANT ONE!!11!

    And don't forget people the R&D of this is privatised so these machines are going to be 1000x more reliable and trustworthy than if they were government developed.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Abit stupid having an entire army made of robots. An EMP would wipe the whole army out.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I can't believe I just read an article that seems to be advocating unnecessarily endangering soldiers to deliberately push up casualties, ostensibly to further the author's political objectives. Disgusting.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

1,337

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
Do you want your parents to be with you when you collect your A-level results?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.