So what are the implications of automating warfare?
Would we be, once again, reducing warfare to a game of electronic chess?
Deepa.
On 11/7/06, Dave Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So, it is possible for a human to use a tree/shrub as camouflage and
> get
> past the robot, right?
Bring me no sensor feeds; let them /dev/null:
Till Birnam wood remove to Dunsinane,
I cannot taint with fear ... The spirits that know
All robot consequences have pronounced me thus:
"Fear not, Macdroid; no creature viviparous
Shall e'er have power upon thee."
So what are the implications of automating warfare?
Is this development, on balance, offensive or defensive? (and does the
answer change as alternative battery technologies become viable?)
By enabling can-on-can violence, might it reduce the level of
slime-on-slime violence? Or would it just ensure that, due to
increasing inability to effectively deny areas, we just become very,
very good at making the rubble bounce?
-Dave
