Skip to comments.
New drone has no pilot anywhere, so who's accountable? (SkyNet?)
LA Times ^
| January 26, 2012
| W.J. Hennigan
Posted on 01/26/2012 5:00:21 AM PST by Second Amendment First
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 last
To: AnAmericanAbroad
Now if your computer says THAT to you, its time to head for the hills. Uh, no. You cut the power.
41
posted on
01/26/2012 7:47:21 AM PST
by
Carry_Okie
(The Slave Party: advancing popular indenture since 1832.)
To: Second Amendment First
I hope we build thousands of these so that in a future potential conflict we can throw dozens into every “blue” kill box available. “Purple” kill boxes we save for manned planes because of potential fratricide issues.
Look how small it is. How many can a big CVN carry? 50? 60?
At sea 40 of these tossing 8 SDB’s a piece at you would mess up your fleet in a big way.
42
posted on
01/26/2012 7:47:30 AM PST
by
gura
(If Allah is so great, why does he need fat sexually confused fanboys to do his dirty work? -iowahawk)
To: gura
43
posted on
01/26/2012 7:53:49 AM PST
by
Lazamataz
(Norm Lenhart knows nothing about reloading.)
To: Little Ray
Exactly. Lotta heat here without much light. The drone isn’t making any decisions. The decisions about where and when to use any weapons are still made by human operators whether that decision is made at launch and programmed in, or made at a point later in the mission.
To say that it has no “pilot” just means that it doesn’t need a person on the stick to do any of the flying. That part can by handled just fine by the computers. But humans are still telling the computer where to fly, when, and what to do then it gets there. Whoever is doing that is really the “pilot”, but instead of a stick and throttle they use a map and a mouse.
It’s written like they’re letting the computer make decisions about who to kill, and that’s just not the case.
44
posted on
01/26/2012 8:04:15 AM PST
by
Ramius
(Personally, I'd give us one chance in three. More tea anyone?)
To: Ramius
I don’t know if its X-47B, but isn’t there a UCAV that can respond to air defense and independently launch an attack against it?
45
posted on
01/26/2012 8:17:00 AM PST
by
Little Ray
(FOR the best Conservative in the Primary; AGAINST Obama in the General.)
To: tet68
46
posted on
01/26/2012 9:26:35 AM PST
by
EEGator
To: Second Amendment First
We could place bets how long it will be until the Iranians or Chinese get hold of one of these.
47
posted on
01/26/2012 9:27:23 AM PST
by
TexasRepublic
(Socialism is the gospel of envy and the religion of thieves)
To: TexasRepublic
The Chinese are most likely selling us their out-of-date technology. The truth is always stranger than fiction.
48
posted on
01/26/2012 9:58:39 AM PST
by
Broker
(Every word from Obama is a lie)
To: Second Amendment First
I just hope that the Iranians don’t get it. You would think we would have learned how to preclude an intercept.
49
posted on
01/26/2012 10:10:38 AM PST
by
Rappini
(Pro Deo et Patria)
To: Second Amendment First
"The deployment of such systems would reflect
a major qualitative change in the conduct of hostilities," committee President Jakob Kellenberger said at a recent conference. "The capacity to discriminate, as required by [international humanitarian law], will depend entirely on the quality and variety of sensors and programming employed within the system."
The "dumb" bombs we dropped in WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc. didn't "discriminate" so what's the issue? Sounds like a bunch of folks that just want to attack the military any way they can.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-50 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson