Gentlemen,
Very intriguing thread. I think it suffers from a limited scope however. Our cultural blinders are showing again. We're talking about 'robots' in combat, but just what is a 'robot'?
Mull these points over for a while:
- A torpedo is a 'robot'.
- A missile is a 'robot'.
- A shell with a proximity fuse is a 'robot'.
Sure, they are all 'one-use' items, but they meet the basic description of a 'robot'. They are all machines that perform tasks independent of human control. The torpedo runs at the depth, at the speed, and along the course it has been told to. A proximity fuse even 'decides' when to explode. Ditto to both for a missile.
So what is a 'robot'? Something with legs? Something that looks vaguely like an animal? Or is it something that performs task independently of active human control?
Most of the suggestions tossed around here have had to do with arms, legs, treads, torsos, and whatnot. We've been thinking about animal-shaped devices that perform a narrow range of functions; bipeds with guns, hexapeds with guns, crawlers with guns, etc. Why handicap a machine in that fashion? It can be more and do more.
In the Real World, the US is currently using various airborne sensor drones and some of them are armed. Last year, we potted some rat bastard in Yemen with the weapons aboard a drone. The drone spotted the car, the drone targeted the Hellfire missile, the drone even guided the missile in for a hit. All the human 'operator' did was 'allow' the drone to fire the missile. Was that a drone on patrol in Yemen or was it a 'robot'?
My last ship, USS California CGN-36, carried two Phalanx CIWS units. Human 'control' of these anit-missile 20mm gatling guns was rather simple; the 'operator' had an off/on switch. When energized, the CIWS would target ANYTHING(1) fitting certain parameters within a few nautical miles of the ship and shoot it down. It selected targets, it fired on targets, it 'decided' when targets were no longer a threat, and it switched to other targets. Is the CIWS a weapon system or is it a 'robot'?
I think many 'warbots' are in use in the Third Imperium. I think many 'warbots' are in use now. I also think we fail to recognize them AS 'warbots'! In the 57th Century, robots are everywhere; "Robots Are Toasters" and "Robots Are Not Tin Men". They are ubiquitous and beneath notice - like mailboxes and telephone poles. Just as your 2004 coffee maker has more of a 'computer' in it than the 1969 Lunar Excursion Module, I beleive that systems in the 57th Century will be more 'robotic' than we imagine.
Sincerely,
Larsen
1 - Sea stories have poorly programmed CIWS units shredding unfortunate seagulls by mistake.
Very intriguing thread. I think it suffers from a limited scope however. Our cultural blinders are showing again. We're talking about 'robots' in combat, but just what is a 'robot'?
Mull these points over for a while:
- A torpedo is a 'robot'.
- A missile is a 'robot'.
- A shell with a proximity fuse is a 'robot'.
Sure, they are all 'one-use' items, but they meet the basic description of a 'robot'. They are all machines that perform tasks independent of human control. The torpedo runs at the depth, at the speed, and along the course it has been told to. A proximity fuse even 'decides' when to explode. Ditto to both for a missile.
So what is a 'robot'? Something with legs? Something that looks vaguely like an animal? Or is it something that performs task independently of active human control?
Most of the suggestions tossed around here have had to do with arms, legs, treads, torsos, and whatnot. We've been thinking about animal-shaped devices that perform a narrow range of functions; bipeds with guns, hexapeds with guns, crawlers with guns, etc. Why handicap a machine in that fashion? It can be more and do more.
In the Real World, the US is currently using various airborne sensor drones and some of them are armed. Last year, we potted some rat bastard in Yemen with the weapons aboard a drone. The drone spotted the car, the drone targeted the Hellfire missile, the drone even guided the missile in for a hit. All the human 'operator' did was 'allow' the drone to fire the missile. Was that a drone on patrol in Yemen or was it a 'robot'?
My last ship, USS California CGN-36, carried two Phalanx CIWS units. Human 'control' of these anit-missile 20mm gatling guns was rather simple; the 'operator' had an off/on switch. When energized, the CIWS would target ANYTHING(1) fitting certain parameters within a few nautical miles of the ship and shoot it down. It selected targets, it fired on targets, it 'decided' when targets were no longer a threat, and it switched to other targets. Is the CIWS a weapon system or is it a 'robot'?
I think many 'warbots' are in use in the Third Imperium. I think many 'warbots' are in use now. I also think we fail to recognize them AS 'warbots'! In the 57th Century, robots are everywhere; "Robots Are Toasters" and "Robots Are Not Tin Men". They are ubiquitous and beneath notice - like mailboxes and telephone poles. Just as your 2004 coffee maker has more of a 'computer' in it than the 1969 Lunar Excursion Module, I beleive that systems in the 57th Century will be more 'robotic' than we imagine.
Sincerely,
Larsen
1 - Sea stories have poorly programmed CIWS units shredding unfortunate seagulls by mistake.