Log in with a social network:
Log in with your username or email:
to finish:military is probably the worst possible use for this thing
in that case, how is a human different from a robot?
could you not build a perfect copy of a human and spark it up in whatever way stops it from being dead? is that a human or a robot?
also.do animals have free will?where does free will start and reaction to stimuli stop?you say robots dont have free will because they are programmed, whos to say we arnt programmed also?it really is UNBELIEVABLE how predictable humans actually are
to the peoples assuming that we will be smart enough to build failsafes into the armageddon style tech: as it gets cheaper and cheaper and more and more common place some twat will just go down to radioshack and build himself one without the failsafes, or just write some virus for it or whatever (not that i think there will be an "end of the world" ever)
all advancing tech is good no matter what
From the moment we`re born we`re told what`s right and wrong, good and bad. Obviously you can `teach` this to a machine, but then the machine becomes nothing but a copy of the creators feelings, not its own.
Free will doesn`t do anything to human behaviour, it IS human behaviour.
A robot is programmed, already dissipating any notion of free will. You can`t `make something think for itself`...because it`s a contradiction of terms.
That`s why people fail on the belief of god AND free will. You can`t have both. And seeing as free will is clearly evident, it renders the existence of a creator both pointless and impossible (in terms).
When things are built (such as robots), the creater imprints his or her feelings, emotions, ideology, etc onto it. This isn`t free will, because it`s being told what to do.
Let me put it this way:
Humans - No creator - Free will due to no imprinting
Robots - Creator - Imprinting from creator
Yeah, I don`t remember a hydraulic powered exoskeleton anywhere in Mario )-|
Also - I`m an only child. And if I were to be drafter, provided I believed in what my people were fighting for, I`d be proud to die for England. Patriotism, dude.
Plus I really dislike robots. Metal freaks me out. >_>
But nope, they want to load Ammo faster, they want to load missiles faster, they want gatling gun infantry.
There goes all my faith in humankind :<`
I know what you mean dude. Their logic would probably be that the exoskeleton being used in war would probably help save lives, but then again, the same applies to it being used to save people from burning buildings like you said. I`ve also lost my faith in humanity :/
I could imagine people building space stations, lifting containers, saving people from burning buildings.
There goes all my faith in humankind :<
I AM IRONMAN!!!
Just as some others have said, robots /are/ getting free will.A robot even got out of the building it was being held in by itself.I think that could definitely be considered `free will`.
Don`t just go "But people are squishy, and have emotions, and etc etc."
Tell me what you think free will *does*. Tell me why we cannot eventually copy it.
That`s why I said "If you can describe it, we can copy it". Most people just throw out "free will" as a really vague concept.
Some say it`s our moral compass. (Copyable). Some say it`s our ability to modify what we think. (Copyable).Some say "it`s the reason we do things". (Vague and doesn`t say what it actually changes).Some say "it`s our emotions". (Vague, but individually copyable). Some say "it`s just a feeling I get". (Vague. Possibly gas. Copyable.)etc.
Either free will *does* something to human behaviour which we can copy, or it doesn`t and we don`t need to include it to make it behave human.
same thing i was thinking. i actually saw this in a popular science magazine a couple years back...
and if robots do become more powerful, one EMP wave to end em all, tehn we can start over at step 1! yay :D
Are human actions not emotionally driven? Havn`t we been taught right and wrong, good and bad? How does a `robot` judge something? How does it use feelings and instincts when its not part of its `nature`?
They`re machines...task specific machines. If you order it to do something, it doesnt think about it or question why it has to do it, it just does it in the way it has been taught is best.
If you move your right arm, the suuit moves its right arm. It doesn`t stop and say "wait, WHY am I moving it? Who created me?"
Its just not in its nature.
for the HAL (human assisted limbs) exoskeleton from Cyberdyne, yes Cyberdyne, if there is anyone out there named John or Sarah Connor; start worrying
If you can describe free will, you can copy it.
If you measure it by randomness, we can build true random number generators using decay of radioactive particles.
If you measure it by a set of rules. Those rules can be programmed in. This includes desires of any kind. In fact, if you look at agent oriented programming, it deals with desire quite frequently.
It is also possible to have a computer generate it`s desires dynamically.
Nintendonut:"Humans aren`t `programmed`. Computers are programmed, we can act randomly."
Actually you can`t demonstrate that at all. Humans are demonstratively programmed. Whether you point to indoctrination, behaviorist reward/punishment systems, genetic indicators. The only question is whether we are entirely programmed, or if there is an element of free will in there as well.
As for human randomness, 1) Clumping occurs all the time. Humans are *not* good random number generators.2) The ability for a human being to generate random numbers can be physically impaired. (Which suggests a physical, and therefore mimicable cause).
So yeah...that`s running.
And please, correct me if I`m wrong. Not in a roostery way.
I won`t join in too much but I will say that if we go on to ignore any warnings or danger theories and really do make powerful sentient machines without devising some sort of fail-safe then we really are stupid.
Nuclear wasteland here I come!
It all started in 2007...
also, when you step out of the "autonomous" version, it will definitely attempt world domination.
My Laptop gets around three hours of use out of it`s battery and it`s draw is minimal, it isn`t running servos and actuators. What sort of life expectancy does one get out of an exoskeleton powersource?
If the military is smart they will start out using these units in supply and repair shops then as the system is refined and perfected move it to the battlefield.
But that is expecting the military to be smart.
Ya because it is going to be designed that poorly in the first place right? God you`re stupid.
Yes, better than Halo 3
I think I`ll just sit on the EMP and wait.
This was probably the most amazing thing I`ve ever seen. AND I`VE SEEN IT ALL MAN!
And one more thing - humans aren`t `programmed`. Computers are programmed, we can act randomly. I`m not going to start a massive debate on free will but trust me, there is no `right answer` as to whether or not we have it.
Advanced Power Armor Mk II, here I come.
PS: A cookie to anyone who has played Fallout and got that reference.
And these are kick ass!!!
robots cannot ever take over or anything like that either- because we cannot grant free will, we can just randomize functions, or create to respond to stimuli."OK, 3 things wrong with that.1. Halo is better then both of those games you mentioned, if you had PLAYED it, then you would have known that.2. The issue was about an exo-skeleton, which cannot be seen in CS or DOD, but in Halo, Master Chief (The main character) wears one just like this, but enclosed.3. It is becoming possible to grant robots free will, to allow them to observe the environment around them and perform any action they desire. We can tell them what to do, and we program functions that limit what else they can do, but, even now, it is scientifically possible to grant a robot with free will.
Now to prepare for the oncoming robot re
I`m scared, and most of you should be as well, technology is advancing at incredible speed--at some point we`re going to turn around and discover we aren`t capable of controlling what we`ve created. People should read science fiction more.
At this rate though, they should have these exoskeletons looking cool and working better than I can imagine by the time I take over the world. Perfect, my army will destroy you all in your frail human bodies.
I may have to rig up some with flamethrower crotches.
Just because I hate you all.
Actually at the current rate (and see Moore`s Law for this), we should be able to build a $1000 comp that is more powerful than the human mind. By 2040.
Keep the pattern going, and we`ll be able to build a $1000 computer more powerful than the human race before 2080.
The idea that we can`t give computers "free will" is a joke. You can`t even demonstrate that you have free will to begin with. That`s why we have psychology, because humans react to stimuli pretty predictably. It`s based on how they`re programmed.
robots cannot ever take over or anything like that either- because we cannot grant free will, we can just randomize functions, or create to respond to stimuli.
Incidentally, the real issue here is cost. You really think we`re going to see these mass produced? Special forces maybe, but when not all the soldiers in Iraq are being given proper bulletproofed vests (What are they? $2000 tops?), I really doubt we`re going to see them in 100x minimum exoskeletons.