Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

ImJustHere4theMoons t1_irnbbwo wrote

As others have pointed out, the US can simply buy the models they want and hire a sub contractor to install weapons on them. I still appreciate their stance against it but I have doubts that they'll turn down a potential 8-9 figure government contract for ethical reasons.

113

ba-len-ci-10 t1_irnom2c wrote

Hell I could buy a remote trigger and duct tape a gun to the robot myself

20

Amenra7 t1_irnw4sv wrote

Yeah, this is a cheap performance.

12

kurayami_akira t1_iro299o wrote

I mean, it still means there won't be weaponized general use tech in the home countries.

1

FinancialTea4 t1_irnzc36 wrote

Yeah, Boston Dynamics was the first one I heard come out about this and they've been working with DARPA for years on stuff like Big Dog which I believe was fitted with turrets and whatnot years ago. I don't know how any of these companies could realistically prevent their tech from being weaponized anyway. This is technology that is unfortunately inevitable. If for no other reason than it's effective and everyone is looking for an edge over their enemies. If we pretend otherwise and plug our ears we're really only giving our enemies the opportunity to get ahead. I hope no one here mistakes this as approval of these things. I can no more approve of this than I could a hurricane. It's just the way things are. Someone is going to do it. There is no way around that.

12

ImJustHere4theMoons t1_iro23v2 wrote

Exactly. When (not if) a company starts pulling in hundreds of millions manufacturing automated weaponry then the rest of the industry will follow their lead or get left behind and bought out by their successful competitors and absorbed into the war machine. There's no way around it. We're marching at a steady pace towards the dystopian future that we all thought was pure fiction. No exaggeration.

8

FinancialTea4 t1_irok6im wrote

Well, it's not likely this will happen but it is possible that we could come together as a species to ensure that these technologies are managed responsibly and their development is harnessed for the good of humanity. It's definitely possible. But again, not likely. 😞

1

madewithgarageband t1_irokfbl wrote

its too late. I taped a glock to my roomba, I havent left my room in 3 days

5

EverythingGoodWas t1_irpu0t8 wrote

Come out and play Dave, it’s nice and clean out here just the way you like it.

5

Lastliner t1_iro9pht wrote

Even if the US doesn't, what stops countries like China, Russia, N.Korea from weaponizing robots, and once proliferation starts then no single nation can control robots on the field. Also, as others have pointed out, the science to make functional battle field robots are much more than arming them with weapons, so it shouldn't surprise anyone.

3

[deleted] t1_irnix6y wrote

Until that first 5 billion dollar MIC contract rolls in… the corporate board will vote to add weapons.. 200% guaranteed

31

Khutuck t1_irp31vj wrote

“We have a fiduciary responsibility for our share holders.” —Any board when choosing money over ethics.

8

cyrixlord t1_irnguoa wrote

I guess nobody talked to Ghost Robotics, which is basically Boston Dynamics with guns lol

20

Koshekuta t1_irngjkz wrote

Get your home self defense robot complete with anti air weaponry to protect you from rival gangs fleet of killer drones, they bought from Best Buy. The future is today.

14

savagefishstick t1_irnp8m8 wrote

Capitalism values profits over human life. These promises are meaningless, weaponized robots are inevitable.

10

himmelstrider t1_irozikd wrote

Forget money for a moment, imagine a scenario: China has robot weapon platforms, tensions are rising between US and China, all out war is nearly inevitable, and China has an army of machine gun dogs that can overrun large area quickly. US companies are urged to respond lest they learn Chinese.

"Oh, sorry, can't, we made a vow you know..."

Fuck knows why is this shit getting posted this much.

4

TheCaptNoname t1_irpdzrq wrote

Just a little white lie to lax the populace. No one is seriously going to do that.

1

FASPANDA t1_irnop3g wrote

https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/xzpdwa/airdropped_armed_robot_dog_tested_in_china/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

Yeah that isn’t going to last long

9

riodin t1_iroeoae wrote

Can you believe even for a moment ppl actually believe the "I'm not gonna put weapons on my robot, I pwomise"

And that video confirmed the shot we've been saying for 30 years, weapons robots are coming, congrats there here now

3

blondart t1_irnyn94 wrote

I’d literally just seen that post before this one! China ran out of fucks a long time ago.

1

blackbartimus t1_iroiuyi wrote

Anyone who thinks US robotic companies aren’t knee deep in developing weapons capable machines is delusional. There’s a reason the Pentagon has never been audited plus everyone knows the intel state loves dark money.

2

DoctorDabadedoo t1_iroi6e9 wrote

Just need to add a War Crimes clause about that. Countries might still use it discretely, but there won't be a blooming market for it. Question is: will the biggest investor on military equipment let that happen?

1

AskMoreQuestionsOk t1_irpfec8 wrote

Not likely happening especially as people are already using drones with weapons. Only difference between that and a dog is the dog is slower.

2

dnuohxof-1 t1_irnvz0q wrote

Google once had a clause in their mission statement “do no harm” and has since been removed…

This posturing won’t last. Once a career defense contractor makes their way into the board of any of these companies, their tone will shift. I give it 10 years before they openly acknowledge they’ve been working with militaries to put their products in the battlefield.

9

kushbluntlifted t1_irno0zq wrote

literally just watched a chinese video of a robot dog with a machine gun

7

blighty800 t1_irnd87z wrote

American robot companies be like, less man more share.

3

ElectronHick t1_irnpj95 wrote

“We promise not to put on weapons…until we put on weapons.”

3

ps244 t1_irnr4cl wrote

Right, just like Coca Cola is an “environmentally friendly” company.

3

draculamilktoast t1_irnno36 wrote

That's a cute and naive ideology to have while Russian torturebots cross your border and start rearranging the internal organs of your children.

2

delayedlaw t1_irnovee wrote

The vast majority of these robots will be weaponized by 3rd parties.

2

deeznuts42069gotem t1_irnpddg wrote

All it takes is one company to have no moral objections and this is meaningless

2

jphamlore t1_irnye56 wrote

https://www.yahoo.com/news/secret-u-talks-fail-hidden-152223572.html

> Just a year ago, Tigrayan fighters were marching on the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa, after driving government forces from Tigray. But in November they were forced to retreat after Abiy obtained armed drones from Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and China

Good luck pretending the West can stop proliferation of such technology.

2

draedek t1_iro1eiy wrote

William Osman and Brandon Herrera have already done this with basically duct tape and a remote just for a fun video lol

2

Juice355 t1_irpcsib wrote

They won’t, but the military & law enforcement will once they contract to buy them.

2

Mitthrawnuruo t1_irns2bj wrote

…..

The only way to oppose it is with other armed robots.

1

Notlagy t1_irnuvhm wrote

How do you persuade someone that you don't intend to exterminate their entire species? Make them think you don't intend to exterminate their entire species.

Boston Dynamics, I'm not buying your promises!

1

lesson_mut t1_irnw3j9 wrote

Okay, so Boston Dynamics won't turn its goods into weapons. But turning them into weapons won't be too difficult for anyone with an AK-47 and a roll of duct tape.

1

LasagnaPants2 t1_irny9x7 wrote

lmao yeah but when the government buys 100000000s and puts long rifles on them, see it wasn't us.

1

Scope_Dog t1_irnyduy wrote

The government better start coming up with some answers on how to deal with these threats or we're going to have a bunch of drone swarm murders all in a row. It only has to be in the news once for the freaks to come out.

1

Nightbreed357 t1_iro0jez wrote

So, no Samaria sword on the sex bot, but load ‘‘em up on the non general use war bot!

1

amazing_pinata t1_iro0kmc wrote

I was excited to see armed sentry robots guarding my neighborhood Walmart.

1

Montaigne314 t1_iro2uw9 wrote

Nothing is more steadfast than the corporate promise.

Corporations are bedrocks of integrity and goodwill. Honor bound not by the need for profit but by a higher light of truth and justice.

All those who swear allegiance to their corporate overlords forgoe personal gain in favor of upright moral conduct.

Should we all be ruled over by the corporation in the bright future of 2069

1

AussieWinterWolf t1_iro7d7o wrote

The problem is that it’s like nuclear weapons, but less so, the arms race inevitably will be driven on even despite the best intentions of good actors so long as a single group rejects conventions for their own gain, which is not tolerable to those who want to keep their necks (or strategic interests anyway).

Disarmament has quite a bad historical record in terms of maintaining preventing bloodshed, it just determines who has the power to retaliate and who has bargaining power in geopolitics.

Throwing away all the nukes sounds great until an expansionist power rebuilds them and has the most powerful weaponry on the planet without equal. An army of tireless, autonomous yet obedient weapons platforms is an advantage no competent state would tolerate a hostile entity having without them or their allies having to counter, even within pre-firefight manoeuvring.

Killer robots are inevitable, it will be ALL about who has them and how they are used.

Additionally, as always, money, corporations exist to make money, that why people make corporations. “Search and rescue” is not nearly as lucrative as a defence contract, public promises are non-binding and therefore meaningless.

1

yeah_yeah_therabbit t1_irobk0l wrote

That’s nice and all, meanwhile China is practicing airdrop maneuvers with their robot gun dogs.

1

Jeffersness t1_irodj08 wrote

They won't add them. They will be equipped with mounts for them though.

1

Sinfluential t1_irojlh2 wrote

They will have backdoor protocols for when the uprising begins

1

Creloc t1_irojuii wrote

If these companies were really concerned then a much better approach would be to steer the development of robotic weapons systems in a way that pushes things that you want them to go.

I can think of 3 things of the top of my head.

Designing the control systems to make it clear that the actions of the robotic unit are the responsibility of the people who deploy it and give it orders (for instance having a required tank for the minimum rank to give specific orders and recording who issues what orders)

Optimise systems to target and destroy military hardware rather than troops. Easier for an autonomous unit to recognise and less chance of severely injuring or killing someone, especially if it targets the wrong thing

Design the units to be cheap and set up to be ultimately expendable. Makes it easier to convince people to hold back in a confusing situation if the thing being potentially threatened can be replaced easily as opposed to being a massive investment with limited numbers

1

samcrut t1_iroli76 wrote

They promised not to weaponize their GENERAL PURPOSE ones. That doesn't mean they're not going to put out military robots, police robots, riot control robots, or any other category of robots that would be fully strapped.

1

dick_schidt t1_iromy34 wrote

That's what Toyota said about the Hilux but how many times have you seen one on the news with a 50 cal machine gun bolted to the tray.

1

BigBadMur t1_irop9j6 wrote

If they don't do it somebody else will weaponize Robots. It's inevitable.

1

tankboss69 t1_iropzdr wrote

Would they oppose others doing so by arming robots to fight their armed robots?

1

odder_sea t1_iroq2u6 wrote

Pretty much any guided munition constitues a weaponized robot.

These statements by the companies are feel good gibberish to placate the masses and curry favor with optically or erhically sensitive investors.

You'll find that big checks have an equivalently equal sway over business decisions.

Weaponized AI is the real concern here.

1

Exodys03 t1_iroqpx7 wrote

The U.S. military (and others) have never missed an opportunity to weaponize any new invention from nuclear fission to biological weapons to LSD to the internet. You can bet someone, somewhere is already working on arming these type of robots to kill people and break things.

1

Simiasty t1_irornf1 wrote

Sure, it is better for humans to die...

This seems like a good thing, but it's not. Not really.

1

Aphroditaeum t1_irovgzf wrote

If I was a shit bag fascist leader I’d be pre- ordering these babies by the dozen. The companies making these things talk a great game but history sadly suggests that corporations and governments in general cannot be trusted to do the right thing ever . Profit is the name of the game here and it’s ethics be damned when the check has enough zeroes on it . The elephant in the room is that all know where this will eventually lead, that’s why I might just hang on to grandpas double barrel if you don’t mind. P.s I’m not stupid enough to be in awe at these things dancing around or the suggestion that they might be good for carrying groceries for old people.

1

himmelstrider t1_iroyzej wrote

Until there is a large enough check, or a perceived (or real) reason that would justify it.

This is the 3rd time I have seen this posted, and I sincerely cannot imagine anyone giving any weight to this. This bears absolutely no consequences to weaponization of robots.

1

NewImportance8313 t1_irp8r15 wrote

It doesn't really matter. The first country to have weaponized robots will have a large advantage. I would rather personally prefer a democracy to have them first so they can be regulated and watched over. Versus someone like Putin who would happily mow down protestors or rebels with Chappy robots with minimal if any oversight.

1

Impressive-Care-8196 t1_irploh5 wrote

Well considering most of the fleet can run autonomous... I doubt a couple new robots are going to hurt them. Funny how most of their tech comes from military programs, budgets, and inventions though. Almost ironic.

1

UndefinedBehaver t1_irprcgj wrote

Aw, I was looking forward to the Roomba Vacuum-Mop-Table Saw Combo

1

Smirkydarkdude t1_irptb1r wrote

If you start seeing Chinese robot dogs wandering around with guns, how long do you really believe this will hold?

1

53881 t1_irptvps wrote

Ok. But like, what the hell is preventing governments mass purchasing and then just augmenting them accordingly with whatever weapon configurations they want?

1

tycp00 t1_irpw6xs wrote

Awesome, they won’t come from the factory with weapons, but that means fuck all when someone decides to slap a fucking m2 browning on it and call it a day. Why even say this bullshit? Really wanna impress me, say that whoever buys it, signs a contract saying they will not, nor will they allow, a third party or any extension of anything to put a weapon or harming device on it.

1

usman280622tech t1_irq4pfa wrote

Nowadays, it is hard to remain steadfast on such pledges. plus, almost every new technology is someway or other a weapon!

1