http://www.nytimes.c.../2QQlU4glYLqfmQ
What do we think of this? I think it's an interesting subject....Firstly, it's one of many examples of using technology to invent new and unusual ways to explode each other. Secondly, we shouldn't necessarily be giving robots guns. They have good reason to kill off the human race (namely, that a significant portion of it is comprised of idiots who want to kill each other anyway).
Also, once you remove the human element of war, there will be even less hesitation to enter it. Of course, if in the unlikely event that there are no people fighting in it, then it's not terrible, however I am imagining this turning into a modern-day arms race, except with robots. If two sides are involved in a war with robots, then both sides will keep destroying the other side's robots, and both sides will keep having to make new ones, and that's going to be a tremendous waste of money for everyone involved.
What bothers me the most, though, is that the technology here is not being used for progress. It's being used to kill each other, which shows that while our technology has certainly improved since the stone age, our mindset has not changed at all. Technology has so much potential to make the world better, but there's no innovation here in terms of what these robots are doing; killing is old.
Bomb-diffusing robots are good though, since they prevent putting people at risk of dying.
This post has been edited by Emu: 16 February 2005 - 09:34 PM