I would think that initially a rumba with quad fifties and a flame thrower would scare the holy shit out of guys like the Muslim State. If they were captured, they could self destruct and take out their captors.
Mines in base? :eek:
I’m talking about in-camp defense, where the mule shoots or just stomps anything moving, in any zones that have been marked as safe to invade. But there would still be the expectation that the goal is to NOT blow up the embassy. As I said before, the advantage of the mule is that it can operate on stairs, indoors, weave through boxes of stuff, and so on. You use the mule like the the Minotaur in a labyrinth, not as a static defense.
Sorry, I thought you were talking about an armed one, not sure why.
That would certainly be a novel use of the bot. I’m not sure if we’d look better by trampling invaders as opposed to the normally accepted methods of shooting them or blowing them up. Robots do change the possibilities.
I imagine that the military could strap some guns to it, with motion detection software for it to find targets, decide whether they’re in the hostile zone, and shoot. Though you could create a version that blocks access and threatens to stomp you, for normal days, when you want to prevent entry to an area. Give the bot the ability to read an ID badge and it would let you pass. Anyone else, no such luck.
Bad idea.
Why?
One word: Skynet.
Would you elaborate for the uninformed?
Skynet was from the Terminator franchise. It was the A.I. the US put in control of its military that became self aware and started the Apocalypse.
Edit: Link
Thanks.
I thought it was satellite TV in Great Britain.
I am having a hard time imagining how the “World’s Smartest” people are having trouble with friend/foe determination.
We now shoot down planes “over the horizon”, do we not? AWACS and all that?
In one of our excursions in the ME (Iraq I?), some hotshot fighter pilot made the headlines by shooting down 2 US choppers - it seems the fighter and the choppers were on different pages re transponder codes of the day.
Aside from those unfortunate misadventures, it is usually just Afghan bridal progressions which get shot up - and they don’'t really count, do they?
Once you get an armored walking troop carrier with independently moving “trailers” for heavy gear, you’ll have something. Once the “trailers” are off-loaded, they make great carriers for the wounded (if any - stuff in the carriers include body armor - which is put on before exiting the APC).
Using the hardware to do the heavy lifting (and greatly extending the range of a troop in full armor) leaves the actually shooting to humans.
Of course, if we could come up with an aerosol invisible, imperceptible “paint” to spray on the bad guys, maybe we could re-visit the rule about robots with guns.
Also, these idiots wanting to go to Syria/Iraq/wherever to join ISIS/ISIL could make great beepers - a small incision in the navel (let alone what could be done comfortably with a whole uterus as a container) - give them 6 months from the time they hit Syria (or entry point of their choice) and then send a predator to say “Hi!” to them and their new friends.
All of a sudden, Western recruits are REALLY going to be unpopular…
I wasn’t thinking “autonomous” I was thinking “remotely piloted” that’s why I mentioned the cameras and the auditorium full of remote operators.
Might be a useful tool, I guess, but it’s awfully noisy.
Well, ok. But that’s basically a drone with a bunch of buddies. Lag keeps them from being as effective as conventional air power. I think until the robot has some degree of autonomy, they’ll be at enough of a handicap on the battlefield that they’ll remain only a threat to unsuspecting targets. Anti-aircraft guns would probably make short work of a swarm of drones.