Effectively the robot is allowed to disarm enemies by prying their guns from their cold dead hands.
1 posted on
04/16/2007 3:15:03 PM PDT by
Flavius
To: KevinDavis
To: Flavius
Robot on robot violence is everyone's problem.
3 posted on
04/16/2007 3:18:20 PM PDT by
cripplecreek
(Peace without victory is a temporary illusion.)
To: Flavius
This power can not be revoked!
4 posted on
04/16/2007 3:20:08 PM PDT by
Clock King
("How will it end?" - Emperor; "In Fire." - Kosh)
To: Flavius
To: Flavius
Our current enemies do not deserve the dignity of being killed by men.
Let the terrorist scum be hunted down and terminated by machines.
7 posted on
04/16/2007 3:23:01 PM PDT by
BenLurkin
To: Howlin; onyx; Clemenza; Petronski; GummyIII; SevenofNine; veronica; Xenalyte; CheneyChick; ...
To: Flavius
The report can be downloaded from
here. (It's a .PDF file.)
11 posted on
04/16/2007 3:35:25 PM PDT by
Brujo
(Quod volunt, credunt.)
To: All
Isaac Asimov's Three Laws of Robotics 1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
To: Flavius
13 posted on
04/16/2007 3:37:43 PM PDT by
moonhawk
(Democrats are to "Diversity and Tolerance" as Islam is to "Peace.")
To: Flavius
First Law of Terminator Robots—I will kill you when I have nothing left but my cold dead hands.
Second Law of Terminator Robots: I’ll be back!
14 posted on
04/16/2007 3:38:48 PM PDT by
wildbill
To: Flavius; Spiff; pjd; irishjuggler; Mycroft Holmes; Duke Nukum; discostu
Be sure to read the short Story by Phillip K Dick called To Serve a Master or even Second Variety.
15 posted on
04/16/2007 3:39:13 PM PDT by
Perdogg
(Cheney-Bolton 2008)
To: Flavius
"rendered epileptic or incapacitated by vomit beams" I knew it. CIA has clandestinely teted this wep sys at college frat parties. splains a lot IMHO.
16 posted on
04/16/2007 3:44:20 PM PDT by
beebuster2000
(choice is not not peace or war, but small war now, or big war later masquerading as peace now.)
To: Flavius
denying someone who wants to kill you their equipment doesn’t solve the problem- it still leaves someone who wants to kill you running around and as pissed as ever. I would’ve thought the flawed premise of gun control makes that much clear.
17 posted on
04/16/2007 4:10:43 PM PDT by
verum ago
(The Iranian Space Agency: set phasers to jihad)
To: Flavius
“Let machines target other machines,” he writes, “and let men target men.” Oh like a machine gun shooting only another machine gun?
18 posted on
04/16/2007 4:22:02 PM PDT by
Bommer
(Global Warming: The only warming phenomena that occurs in the Summer and ends in the Winter!)
To: Flavius
19 posted on
04/16/2007 4:36:53 PM PDT by
Kevmo
(Duncan Hunter just needs one Rudy G Campaign Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVBtPIrEleM)
To: Flavius
Having combat bots on the field will certainly demoralize opponents .... sure people are ready to kill for a lot of things like ideology or religion. How many of them are willing to risk their lives and ‘souls’ to kill 150,000 dollars worth of autonomous combat robots?
20 posted on
04/16/2007 4:42:14 PM PDT by
Centurion2000
(Killing all of your enemies without mercy is the only sure way of sleeping soundly at night.)
To: Flavius
If we’re all going to agree to the same robot laws, then why don’t we just agree to not have war?
Only law of robotics:
There shouldn’t be any restrictions on autonomous weapons, proposed by bleeding hearts. Otherwise, the enemy is given the advantage.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
