[vox_mundi]

AI expert calls on colleagues to take a stand on autonomous killer robots

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')rtificial Intelligence expert and professor at the University of California, Stuart Russell, has published a Comment piece in the journal Nature, calling out colleagues to take a stand on the development of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS)—armed robots that enter the battlefield without human masters and make decisions about who to kill. He suggests the technology is developed enough now that it is time those in the field, such as roboticists, AI experts and computer scientists, step up and take a stand regarding the development of such systems.

Currently, drones in the battlefield are armed and are used to kill and cause damage—but all of them are merely extensions of a human being; a human pilot sits remotely at the controls steering the craft and pressing buttons that cause munitions to be deployed. But that could change very soon, Russell notes, a variety of scientists are working on projects that could very well lead to LAWS, and thus far, nothing has been done to add a voice to whether it is something that should happen.

Robotics: Ethics of artificial intelligence, Nature, http://www.nature.com/news/robotics-eth ... ce-1.17611

[Keith_McClary]

27 min. CBC Radio interview with biographer:
Elon Musk: Out to change the way we live on Earth and in space
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'E')lon Musk has always been a bit of an enigma. He's responsible for some of the most visionary, and potentially world-changing companies today... operating in realms as diverse as online payments, electric cars, and rocket ships.

It's an unprecedented trajectory, and one that's just been charted with some unprecedented access -- in a new biography titled, "Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX and the Quest for a Fantastic Future."

And it's written by Bloomberg Businessweek correspondent Ashlee Vance, who joined us from San Francisco.

[vox_mundi]

Check out slicing a pea pod lengthwise with a katana - its special...

Yaskawa robot cuts like human sword master in demo (w/ Video)

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')wareness, focus, precision, speed—highly desirable qualities not only for human workers but for robots. Yaskawa Electric Corporation recently issued a video that is turning heads as to just what present-day robotics engineers can accomplish.

They have presented a video showing what happens when their industrial robot—Motoman MH24—is placed in competition with a world-famous sword master.

Welcome to a Yaskawa challenge, featuring a robot and human expert engaging in a display of skills around bamboo poles. Essentially, this is a challenge where viewers can witness the performance reach of a modern-day industrial robot. Qualities such as "agility," "accuracy" and "flexibility" were on trial—could the robot stand up to the real sword master?

Isao Machii is a iaijutsu ( a sword technique cultivated from ancient times) Master, and five-time world record holder. As a sword technique, iaijutsu teaches how to draw quickly. Machii's fans worldwide know him for his feats, and supporters say he can take the level of eye/hand coordination higher than anyone else.

Case in point: his having cut a speeding bullet in mid-air with his sword. At a firing range outside the hills of Los Angeles, he was shown a BB gun pellet which he was to slice with his sword. He did.

The Malay Mail Online said the robot and Machii were surrounded by a manmade bamboo grove "and to make it even more authentic, the MH24 was equipped with a real katana, made in the Edo period." (The Japanese sword, katana, is a martial art discipline in the education of the classical warrior. The katana is a work of high craftsmanship.)

"We analyzed Machii's sword technique in 3D," said the company team. They reproduced the movements in their industrial robot. Test sequences carried out to test the skills of Machii against the robot's were to cut in four directions; a diagonal cut; rising cut; horizontal cut; and the show-stopper, a thousand cuts.

"While Machii looks visibly tired towards the end of the final '1000 cuts' scene, his mechanical counterpart could probably go on for at least an extra 2000," commented Emiko Jozuka in Motherboard.

Yaskawa competes in the international automation market. Today, according to Japanista, Yaskawa produces machines for handling complex tasks, which range from assembly to welding, and from painting to surgery.

[onlooker]

Well, I have been thinking about all this. I have no direct experience in this field just read some. I feel that first, are not computers and robots dependent on programming. They do not create their own "thoughts", they simply follow instructions albeit in complex and very very fast. Second, the decision to kills humans implies some sort of emotional judgement. Saying computers can continue to progress in solving complex problems is different then saying computers can make value judgements. This would involve emotions. I do not see us able to program emotions into computers anytime soon. We hardly even understand their complexities within ourselves at this time. So I find this claim absurd. But that is just a layman opinion.

[onlooker]

That hypothesis is very plausible and makes much sense. In fact to take it one step further, some experts argue that advanced beings would be some sort of cyborg organisms part biological part machine. I rule out nothing when it comes to the vastness of space and the eons of existence of what we call the Universe.

[dinopello]

Video: South Korean team beats out American teams for $2 million prize in DARPA robotic challenge

American teams took 2nd and 3rd for $1M and $0.5 M respectively. Scary stuff.

[vox_mundi]

http://futureoflife.org/AI/open_letter_ ... us_weapons

Killer robots: The soldiers that never sleep

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')s early as 2005 the New York Times reported the Pentagon’s plans to replace soldiers with autonomous robots.

... A targeting square blinks onto the computer screen, zeroing in on a vehicle that’s moving in the camera’s viewfinder. The gun’s muzzle pans as the red square, like something lifted from futuristic military video game Call of Duty, moves across the screen. The speaker, which must accompany the turret on all of its expeditions, is known as an acoustic hailing robot. Its voice has a range of three kilometres. The sound is delivered with unimaginable precision, issuing a warning to a potential target before they are shot (a warning must precede any firing, according to international law, one of the lab-coat wearing engineers tells me). “Turn back,” it says, in rapid-fire Korean. “Turn back or we will shoot.”

The “we” is important. The Super aEgis II, South Korea’s best-selling automated turret, will not fire without first receiving an OK from a human. The human operator must first enter a password into the computer system to unlock the turret’s firing ability. Then they must give the manual input that permits the turret to shoot. “It wasn’t initially designed this way,” explains Jungsuk Park, a senior research engineer for DoDAAM, the turret’s manufacturer. Park works in the Robotic Surveillance Division of the company, which is based in the Yuseong tech district of Daejon. It employs 150 staff, most of whom, like Park, are also engineers. “Our original version had an auto-firing system,” he explains. “But all of our customers asked for safeguards to be implemented. Technologically it wasn’t a problem for us. But they were concerned the gun might make a mistake.”

“When we started this business we saw an opportunity,” says Yangchan Song, DoDAAM’s managing director of strategy planning, as we sit down in a cooled meeting room following the demonstration. “Automated weapons will be the future. We were right. The evolution has been quick. We’ve already moved from remote control combat devices, to what we are approaching now: smart devices that are able to make their own decisions.”
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')size=150]... “The next step for us to get to a place where our software can discern whether a target is friend, foe, civilian or military,” he explains. [/size]

[dinopello]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('vox_mundi', '[')b] Killer robots: The soldiers that never sleep

[onlooker]

I personally see it ludicrous the idea of cyborgs or robots turning on us. On the other hand, already we are seeing robotics play an integral part in military arsenals.

[sparky]

.
a few years ago I participated in a study on autonomous combat systems ,
it was done by a U.S. university with a grant from the defense department ,
the main issue were the ethics and safeguards such systems must strive for

the core of the problem is that identification as friend or foe of a validated target is not easy to implement
any tagging as friendly could be used as a cover for the opponent or even used to reveal the friendlies themselves

the second is sensors limitations , especially in a confused environment

the recommendations were to have no closed loop control on deadly systems unless the mis-identification was unprobable
,typical of sea or aerial warfare over a narrow time and area interval

for any other use , an human tagging and authorization was desirable
in all case an abort command was imperative , either as a positive instruction or as a negative ,
not receiving a valid signal to proceed.

robots wouldn't turn on "US" they would do what they are made to do , set up to do and located where to do it

[JV153]

Well, this nutcase of a guy rammed me (he was waiting for me) just as I was turning the handle to get off a train (saying "You turned it the (handle) wrong way). Everything is like getting so staccato right now.

[Tanada]

The future is nearly now.

[vox_mundi]

Humans Need Not Apply



China sets up first unmanned factory; all processes are operated by robots

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ') BEIJING: A Chinese firm specialising in precision technology has set up the first unmanned factory at Dongguan city where all the processes are operated by robots, regarded as futuristic solution to tide over China's looming demographic crisis and dependence on manual workers.

In the plant, all the processes are operated by computer- controlled robots, computer numerical control machining equipment, unmanned transport trucks and automated warehouse equipment.

The technical staff just sits at the computer and monitors through a central control system.

At the workshop of Changying Precision Technology Company in Dongguan, known as the "world factory", which manufactures cell phone modules, 60 robot arms at 10 production lines polish the modules day and night, state-run People's Daily reported.

Each line has an automatic belt with just three workers who are just responsible for checking lines and monitoring. A few months ago, it required 650 workers to finish this process.

A robot arm can replace six to eight workers, now there are 60 workers and the number will be reduced to 20 in the future, Luo Weiqiang, general manager of the company told the Daily.

This is the first step of the "Robot Replace Human" programme, it said.

[Newfie]

Funny, I was just thinking the first commercial robots will be life like sex partners. The second will be unemployment compensation clerks.

[Keith_McClary]

Dilbert

[Tanada]

Keith, stupid is as stupid does. That scenario is all too likely if such a scenario were even possible.

[vox_mundi]

What could possibly go wrong ...

Starfish-killing robot close to trials on Great Barrier Reef

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')n autonomous starfish-killing robot is close to being ready for trials on the Great Barrier Reef, researchers say.

The Cotsbot robot, which has a vision system, is designed to seek out starfish and give them a lethal injection.

"Over the next five months we plan to progressively increase the level of autonomy the robot is allowed, leading to autonomous detection and injection of the starfish."

[Keith_McClary]

Minimum Security

[vox_mundi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('onlooker', 'W')ell, I have been thinking about all this. I have no direct experience in this field just read some. I feel that first, are not computers and robots dependent on programming. They do not create their own "thoughts", they simply follow instructions albeit in complex and very very fast. Second, the decision to kills humans implies some sort of emotional judgement. (... not true) Saying computers can continue to progress in solving complex problems is different then saying computers can make value judgements. This would involve emotions. (... the antithesis of a value judgement is an emotional judgement) I do not see us able to program emotions into computers anytime soon. (... no emotion required) We hardly even understand their complexities within ourselves at this time. So I find this claim absurd. But that is just a layman opinion.