This is your fault Sup Forums

This is your fault Sup Forums
youtube.com/watch?v=LLQUDoT95Yg
We are all going to die

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/TlO2gcs1YvM
youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>killer robots
These already fucking exists, and are called predator drones.

>inb4 m-m-muh autonomity
They fly on their own until they identify potential targets, after that an operator has to take manual control. This is because of current legislation, not because of technical challenges.

>This is because of current legislation, not because of technical challenges.
This is suppose to be comforting?
It literally takes one Abdula to steal the tech and unleash it on people much less a shady as fuck country.

>This is suppose to be comforting?
No

>It literally takes one Abdula to steal the tech and unleash it on people much less a shady as fuck country.
I'm not worried about Abdullah stealing military-grade tech, user. A drone is not invisible on radar, nor is it invulnerable to stuff like EM pulses or targeted laser cannons or even "traditional" anti-aircraft technology such as flak cannons etc. I'm far more concerned with the US government and other "democratic countries" assassinating people (often with "collateral damage") without judge or jury or a so-called fair trial.

fucking luddites

Fair concern.

The ever-lowering requirements for evidence before an assassination is approved is what is eventually going to lead to the development of fully autonomous weapons systems, where you simply feed your AI with info about desired targets and the systems themselves will decide whether to kill or not.

The scenario shown in the video posted in OP is unlikely, if you want to take out an entire population, biological and chemical weapons are far more effective.

These days, you can even use viruses to take out individual targets. In laboratory studies, researchers have shown that you can reprogram a virus to only be activated if it encounters a specific DNA sequence. This means that in not so distant future, it may be possible to spread lethal diseases that are harmless to the general population but will be activated when encountering a specific individual.

>These days, you can even use viruses to take out individual targets. In laboratory studies, researchers have shown that you can reprogram a virus to only be activated if it encounters a specific DNA sequence. This means that in not so distant future, it may be possible to spread lethal diseases that are harmless to the general population but will be activated when encountering a specific individual.
Even the people making these viruses know this is a terrible idea. The virus once released just has to mutate a few times and suddenly we have an apocalypse plague.

With mini drones you can send an army in the night to blast small holes in the heads everyone in a small town.
Weapon Proliferation in general is scary stuff.

>The virus once released just has to mutate a few times
As with everything else in evolution, viruses mutate solely for the reason of spreading. For example, it's far more likely that current viral diseases such as Malaria and HIV will mutate in such a way that their deadliness drops drastically. However, given the fact that current medicines are quite effective for living with (and not curing) malaria and HIV, we've taken away this evolutionary boundary (inb4 some edgelord comment and say that we should just let black people die from malaria and AIDS then without helping them).

>With mini drones you can send an army in the night to blast small holes in the heads everyone in a small town.
No need. Can kill them off with ABC weapons more cost-effectively and still leave infrastructure intact.

>Weapon Proliferation in general is scary stuff.
Indeed.

...

>Government unironically building bastion-like units at this very moment

These threads aren't fun anymore. You used to get /x/ posters that were truly afraid if drones because they believe drones are truly uncounterable. Now theres no one to claim copper makes drones 100% laser proof or that turrets can't turn fast enough to take out a drone.

It's not a conspiracy. It's not suppose to be fun.
Governments of the world are literally making death robot armies.
If nukes and man-made viruses don't kill us, Robots will.

>hurrr duurrr dem robads are eeevullll

*sigh*
The highly intelligent user definitely knows that robots will never be used for such slaughter. Only to cook your tendies. right?

>le sigh xDDD
I can't wait for them to become a reality so that they can wipe out all of you retard technophobes.

Oh user. You can only act so autistic before it starts effecting you irl. I'm sure you've already discovered that though.

>you can reprogram a virus to only be activated if it encounters a specific DNA sequence.
Didn't viruses "reproduce" by hijacking of the host's protein-building system? If they don't do that, then how would they "select" the correct host? Eventually all specimens would infect the wrong target, and subsequently die.

>As with everything else in evolution, viruses mutate solely for the reason of spreading.
You have literally no understanding of biology and evolution.

how does it feel to be a neo-luddite

>being against automated robots meant to assassinate humans
>must be Neo-Luddism
What kind of twisted, pants-on-head retarded logic do you use to call me that?

The point is that you're buying into FUD that is meant to hurt the robotics and AI industry, you are a fucking retard if you fell for this meme video.

The robotics and AI industry is different from the Military robotics and AI industry.
Yes, they should both be regulated. If that hurts them, then oh well they will still grow to unfathomable heights.
You're literally the dumbest little shit I've seen on this board.

just keep manufacturing them, and drop them from planes everyday. They'll find their target eventually.

>lets hamper our technology with shitty laws so that other countries can get an edge over us
Great plan you fucking primitivist retard. Get back to your cave.

>its another "techies tries to get attention by using scare tactics on the normies" episode

More like
>Lets make sure we don't accidentally cause a genocide or mass extinction because we are scared of the asian/arabic/russian boogeyman.
Go back to Sup Forums. Tech is obviously way to advanced for you to start thinking about.

>a neo-luddite tells a technology-apologist to get out of a technology board
the absolute state of Sup Forums

The problem none of you luddites seem to be able to address is the explosive is the problem, not the software.
Facial dectection and person tracking is a good thing.
Imagine this weapon existed and the US military used it.
Precisely killing a single desired target is a good thing.
Obviously unleashing a bunch of drones to just kill random people is mad and I don't see how current laws permits that.
But what are you going to do about it?
Stop all software research so it is only terrorists that research these things?
How the fuck is that going to help anyone?

>Lets make sure we don't accidentally cause a genocide
This part is not very likely.
If it happens, it will be intentional.

UAV's with explosives are not likely to be a legal consumer product.
So the incentive to mass produce these will not be a commercial incentive.
If someone were to build a ton of these, how would it be any different than if someone builds a ton of bombs?

Making such a system is incredibly hard.
Have you seen small drones like that?
How long did they fly?
Certainly not long enough to cross state lines in the US.
So the accidental part is clearly not in the picture, neither is the genocide part.

But lets entertain the idea that someone would use these to commit mass murder.
How is this any different than current methods?
A gun is also "local" but the las vegas shooting showed that a single gunman can be a huge threat even if he was removed quickly.
If someone ships a ton of bombs to different locations, you have a huge problem.
How is making laws going to prevent that?

You're batshit crazy man if you think I'm a neo-luddite. Then again, you know jack shit about me, and it's hopeless trying to reason with a literal autist.

>How is this any different than current methods?
user.... Guns have a person literally behind them. This is telling a computer with a gun/bomb/poison needle to go kill a human who looks like whatever the person programming says it looks like.

I don't know if any laws can prevent this bullshit, but it should probably be looked over before someone accidentally or not send a robodeath swarm on someone or some persons.

I'm not disillusioned into thinking none of this will happen and the governments of the world will all get together to ban this tech because they are already 95% there.
AI and robots are going to make human life the easiest shit ever, more than it already has, but it could very very very easily get turned around with us just because of the military robots.

This

This neo-luddite is good for some laughs, but it's not as fun as some retard claiming drones are too fast for turrets when we already have AA systems that shoot down artillery shells and rockets. Nevermind active defense systems that don't even use turrets to shoot.

Have fun when the US military deploys their drones to kill your doppelganger.

KYS neo-luddite

How is programming a drone to kill someone legally different from just giving a Hitman the photo of the target? Or are you making the argument that people never make mistakes identifying the proper target?

>Mfw people are getting called neo-luddites because they are worried about military death robots
Is everyone this board this retarded?

>facial recognition is evil because a kill drone could use it

kys neo-luddite

Moving those goal posts? Jeez sounds like something an autist would do.

>NEOLUUDIIERT

>I'm not a neo-luddite
>but this technology is baaad mkay
You are literally arguing for technology-crippling legislation, do you really fucking think that it would be legally ok to let drones genocide civilians? I'm telling you again: you fell for a meme-video spreading FUD.

>actually using the "death robot" buzzword
kys

>y-y-youre an a-autist

isnt your argument just don't develop new technology because they can be misused? That's pretty dumb.

How is that different from them sending a bomb for the guy next to me?
>Guns have a person literally behind them
Yes? Humans are very intelligent, which means this is currently more lethal than an AI controlled weapon.
>if any laws can prevent this bullshit
The point I was trying to make is that people who commit mass murder does not care about the law.
Fixing it by making more laws is not really the solution here.
The problem is the explosives, not the software.
I know it is the same argument as "guns don't kill people, bullets do" but I don't see it as that big a threat.
>but the military could do this to us
That would be illegal.
It is easier to hold a government accountable for something like this.

>kill a human who looks like whatever the person programming says it looks like.
It is very easy to fool CV.
If I can take out drones with a flash light, then I am not scared of it.

>How is that different from them sending a bomb for the guy next to me?
It's not. You were the one advocating that the government killing people is somehow good.

>Fixing it by making more laws is not really the solution here.
>That would be illegal.
Wat

>HURRRR UR NEOLUDDIBIDITITE CUZ U HATE this
>HuuuuuuR WE shuld let every country have this tech
>HUuuUUUR They're not DeAtHRoBoTs Tehy're drooooones
Autism.

>isnt your argument just don't develop new technology because they can be misused
Did I ever say anywhere that we should straight up stop building new tech? Is everyone here just reading what they want to read without actually reading? You're pretty dumb

>If I can take out drones with a flash light, then I am not scared of it.
Ya.... I'm sure the entire American/Russian/Chinese governments will be stopped by flashlights. They will totally not think of that when building their robots

>something will be illegal without us making more laws

The current state of AI killing robots.

>You were the one advocating that the government killing people is somehow good
He never said that.
>>Fixing it by making more laws is not really the solution here.
>>That would be illegal.
>Wat
You did not read his post correctly

>oh no, they called out my backwards amish mentality!
>better call them autistic
Great defense my dear anarcho-primitivists. Down with the civilisation, amirite? xD

Killing people is illegal you dumb fuck, you don't need new technology-crippling laws for every new type of weapon.

You can't be against kill drones without being against all of the components you retard.

No you're autistic because you're not making real arguments. You're just screaming NEOLUDDITE LUL with no basis which makes you pretty fucking autistic or just a straight idiot at the very least.
Graduate High School bud and you might gain some maturity, but that's looking doubtful.

>You can't be against kill drones without being against all of the components you retard.
Yes you can? Like what kind of fucking stupid statement was that?

You're not making any arguments either, you're just parroting irrational fear mongering.

>ur dum
>I don't oppose technology, I just don't want it available to the general population because someone might make a kill bot like in that scary movie :(

kys

Here guys. Save this to your computer and study it. Maybe after a little bit of knowledge gets put into those empty skulls, you guys might be able to say something without looking like illogical fools because what you both just said are straight up lies.

Name one example of a banned weapon of which you can legally own an important component of its design.

>if I keep shitposting maybe they will stop calling me out
I understand that this is how neo-luddites like to discuss, but please don't do this on a technology board.

>have consumer camera drone designed to focus on faces and those of specific programmed target
>easily replace camera with shotgun shell, so shutter will fire shell

OMG BAN ALL KKKAMERA DRONES

>Name one example of a banned weapon of which you can legally own an important component of its design.
Flamethrowers

>I understand that this is how neo-luddites like to discuss, but please don't do this on a technology board.
Now this is a good point to pull out that handy dandy chart I just gave you. Maybe you'll learn something after you identify the logical fallacy you just committed.

That's exactly what I said! Thank you! Just like everyone else in this thread you managed to take what I said, change what it meant, and then say I said it to try to make yourself look smarter! Would be a shame if that was one of many logical fallacies.

You might as well say SMGs

yes this is Sup Forums's fault for not being able to add up to a single effort to prevent technology from becoming a popular science.

You can't be against guns without also being against steel and machines.

...

It's fake, retard.
youtu.be/TlO2gcs1YvM

>I hate guns so I hate all mechanical devices

>he thinks he can legally own napalm if his country has banned flamethrowers

Also check out the 'argument from fallacy' fallacy before you go full retard with your highschool-tier debate skills you fucking caveman.

>not carrying a EMP device on your pocket
You deserve.

>he thinks he can legally own napalm if his country has banned flamethrowers
There you go making up things again.

>using a gay streaming site meme

No daddy no! The Ad hominems are too much!

Dumbass
youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA

You need to have an argument in the first place to get ad-hominem'd you monkey, all you do is shitpost.

I gave my piece. You just scream and cried neo-luddite. So who's the real monkey? Need a banana?

FUD is not an argument.

>I don't like your argument because it scares me so ITS NOT AN ARGUMENT DEAL WITH IT REEEEEEE

>posted the sticky debating image from Sup Forums
>doesn't even adhere to it
>screeches autistically when somebody points out his "arguments" have no logical basis

I'm sure I'm not the one screeching buddy. It's hard to have a real argument when you don't want one because I tried that but you just pooped your pants and gurgled neoluddite over and over :)
Hope you have a good day cause it sounds like you need a little love in your life.

You haven't made a single coherent, logical argument in this entire thread.

Free entertainment. That's all you are doing right now. For real, thanks bud. This has been great. Can't do it forever tho, so I bid you adieu.
Good luck with those reading comprehension skills. High School can actually be sort of difficult without those.

>gets called out on his luddite irrational opinions
>"i-i must go"
Please don't ever come back to Sup Forums again.

Oh I'll always be here buddy. Keep thinking I'm a neo-luddite. It's honestly pretty entertaining just thinking about the backwards logic you use to come with that conclusion.

No need to screech after I said that kid. We've been through it.

>openly admits he will continue shitting up Sup Forums