Skynet

According to Wikipedia they've been in use by UK military since 1969...
 
Ah yes, but everyone knows that all major IT and defence projects run late.... ;)
 
The difference between the Skynet in Terminator series and the British Skynet was that the Skynet in Terminator had access to the United States Nuclear Arsenal and missile silos. The US has about 10000 nukes. The British have, what, about 200 at most? And those aren't even operational.

The other difference between the 2029 Skynet and British Skynet is that the one in Terminator had the programming and the chips to be self aware, whle the other one is just simply a telecommunications satalite.
 
Update:

RaidersNewsNetwork.com – Breaking News, U.S., World, Science, and Mystery

" Following the announcement of the new Flying-HK-style "Reaper" death machines for the British forces, the prophetic nature of the Terminator movies has been further confirmed.

Not only will the UK MoD deploy airborne cyber-gunships remarkably similar to those in the films, the flying robot assassins will be controlled by an IT project named "Skynet".

This latest case of life imitating art (well, kind of art) was revealed this morning, with the news that the first of the Skynet 5 satellites has gone operational and is now successfully carrying data to and from British forces fighting in Southwest Asia.

"This important milestone is very good news for the armed forces," said Lord Drayson, the Minister for Defence Procurement. "Skynet 5 will supply about 2.5 times the capacity of the old system and generate a very significant improvement for our global communications systems - allowing us to pass more data faster. It is an excellent example of a successful Private Finance Initiative (PFI) deal."

This PFI was the largest ever signed by the UK MoD, around £3.6bn in total. The Skynet 5 satellites are run by Paradigm Secure Communications and were built by EADS-Astrium. Skynet 5A was launched into space aboard an Ariane 5-ECA rocket from French Guiana in March, sharing the ride with an Indian TV platform. Skynet 5B and 5C will follow later this year and next.

It seems pretty clear that the Reaper flying kill machines will be run using the Skynet satellites, not any other comms channels.

"Take for example the capability of unmanned air vehicles. These generate a lot of imagery and that has to be passed over a secure communications link," according to Bill Sweetman, technology and aerospace editor for defence analysts Jane's.

"The practice is to offload mundane traffic on to commercial satellites and then to use a complementary, secure proprietary system for the traffic that has to be protected."

And it may not just be the Reapers that are controlled by Skynet. There's no word yet of any plans to cloak Asimo robots in living flesh cloned from large Austrian bodybuilders, but it can only be a matter of time.

"Ground control segments for the new system have been upgraded," reported the Beeb today. "Ships, planes and land vehicles are being equipped to make the best use of the upgraded Skynet."

Or for Skynet to make use of them. ®

The Register"
 
Someone has a really sick sense of humour. I bet the first cyborg will look like Arnold Schwarzenegger. And I hope I'm around to see it.
 
Thirty years ago the military had few robots. Then they began using remote control bomb disposal units. Then mine detection units. Now they are developing flying reconnaissance units. They will soon have more robots than anyone else.

No doubt about it, this is coming. But the combat robot; the "Soldier Boy" from Joe Haldeman's Forever Peace, that will be a revolution. If you use robots to fight robots and soldiers you dehumanise the conflict. It prolongs the conflict because there is no loss of life back where the soldiers are being sent from. So, no public outcry over any deaths. Conflicts like those in Iraq and Vietnam would never end; but just go on forever.

And when robot fights robot, how easy would it then be for the mistake to happen and the robot kills civilians instead. You can even imagine the seemingly ridiculous scenario of Star Trek - A Taste of Armageddon actually coming true.

That's why you shocked me with that The Register spoof news story.
 
For technologically advanced nation robot production maintains a constant technological edge.

Expect more, many more, especially aircraft. Not having a human in the cockpit decreases cost, decreases risk and allows planes to manoeuvre much more sharply.

America will be the first to fill the sky with them.
 
I don't know about "fill the sky" but they're already buzzing around Iraq and Afghanistan. The three American troops captured near Mahmudiya were first discovered missing, according to the BBC website, by an "anmanned aerial vehicle" (BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | American troops missing in Iraq)

The big problem with robot troops is movement: we're much more likely to see the light tank / mobile gun-turret device from Robocop 2, I would have thought. Again, mostly designed for remote operation with options for semi-autonomy.

A second big problem, is "Robot kills child/dog/laptop" headlines (depending on incident and quality of journal). Even in a war scenario the military-mongers don't want innocent victims, I presume. Being the first to kill such innocents by robot is not a first they'll cherish being and certainly I'm not sure the world will accept it as sufficiently common to happen more than once or twice (by notable accident).
 
Look I am happy to be Sarah Connor, as long as its Michael Beihn that comes and saves me (from T1) and not Arnie (T2) Otherwise I'm not playing!!!!!!!!!!
 
Danger Room - Wired Blogs

Robots have been roaming the streets of Iraq, since shortly after the war began. Now, for the first time -- the first time in any warzone -- the machines are carrying guns. After years of development, three "special weapons observation remote reconnaissance direct action system" (SWORDS) robots have deployed to Iraq, armed with M249 machine guns. The 'bots "haven't fired their weapons yet," Michael Zecca, the SWORDS program manager, tells DANGER ROOM. "But that'll be happening soon."
The SWORDS -- modified versions of bomb-disposal robots used throughout Iraq -- were first declared ready for duty back in 2004. But concerns about safety kept the robots from being sent over the the battlefield. The machines had a tendency to spin out of control from time to time. That was an annoyance during ordnance-handling missions; no one wanted to contemplate the consequences during a firefight.
So the radio-controlled robots were retooled, for greater safety. In the past, weak signals would keep the robots from getting orders for as much as eight seconds -- a significant lag during combat. Now, the SWORDS won't act on a command, unless it's received right away. A three-part arming process -- with both physical and electronic safeties -- is required before firing. Most importantly, the machines now come with kill switches, in case there's any odd behavior. "So now we can kill the unit if it goes crazy," Zecca says.
As initially reported in National Defense magazine, only three of the robots are currently in Iraq. Zecca says he's ready to send more, "but we don't have the money. It's not a priority for the Army, yet." He believes that'll change, once the robots begin getting into firefights.
 
Automated killer robots 'threat to humanity': expert

Increasingly autonomous, gun-totting robots developed for warfare could easily fall into the hands of terrorists and may one day unleash a robot arms race, a top expert on artificial intelligence told AFP. "They pose a threat to humanity," said University of Sheffield professor Noel Sharkey ahead of a keynote address Wednesday before Britain's Royal United Services Institute.
Intelligent machines deployed on battlefields around the world -- from mobile grenade launchers to rocket-firing drones -- can already identify and lock onto targets without human help.
There are more than 4,000 US military robots on the ground in Iraq, as well as unmanned aircraft that have clocked hundreds of thousands of flight hours.
The first three armed combat robots fitted with large-caliber machine guns deployed to Iraq last summer, manufactured by US arms maker Foster-Miller, proved so successful that 80 more are on order, said Sharkey.
But up to now, a human hand has always been required to push the button or pull the trigger.
It we are not careful, he said, that could change.
Military leaders "are quite clear that they want autonomous robots as soon as possible, because they are more cost-effective and give a risk-free war," he said.

Several countries, led by the United States, have already invested heavily in robot warriors developed for use on the battlefield.
South Korea and Israel both deploy armed robot border guards, while China, India, Russia and Britain have all increased the use of military robots.
Washington plans to spend four billion dollars by 2010 on unmanned technology systems, with total spending expected rise to 24 billion, according to the Department of Defense's Unmanned Systems Roadmap 2007-2032, released in December.
James Canton, an expert on technology innovation and CEO of the Institute for Global Futures, predicts that deployment within a decade of detachments that will include 150 soldiers and 2,000 robots.
The use of such devices by terrorists should be a serious concern, said Sharkey.
Captured robots would not be difficult to reverse engineer, and could easily replace suicide bombers as the weapon-of-choice. "I don't know why that has not happened already," he said.
But even more worrisome, he continued, is the subtle progression from the semi-autonomous military robots deployed today to fully independent killing machines.
"I have worked in artificial intelligence for decades, and the idea of a robot making decisions about human termination terrifies me," Sharkey said.

Ronald Arkin of Georgia Institute of Technology, who has worked closely with the US military on robotics, agrees that the shift towards autonomy will be gradual.
But he is not convinced that robots don't have a place on the front line.
"Robotics systems may have the potential to out-perform humans from a perspective of the laws of war and the rules of engagement," he told a conference on technology in warfare at Stanford University last month.
The sensors of intelligent machines, he argued, may ultimately be better equipped to understand an environment and to process information. "And there are no emotions that can cloud judgement, such as anger," he added.
Nor is there any inherent right to self-defence.
For now, however, there remain several barriers to the creation and deployment of Terminator-like killing machines.
Some are technical. Teaching a computer-driven machine -- even an intelligent one -- how to distinguish between civilians and combatants, or how to gauge a proportional response as mandated by the Geneva Conventions, is simply beyond the reach of artificial intelligence today.

But even if technical barriers are overcome, the prospect of armies increasingly dependent on remotely-controlled or autonomous robots raises a host of ethical issues that have barely been addressed.
Arkin points out that the US Department of Defense's 230 billion dollar Future Combat Systems programme -- the largest military contract in US history -- provides for three classes of aerial and three land-based robotics systems.
"But nowhere is there any consideration of the ethical implications of the weaponisation of these systems," he said.
For Sharkey, the best solution may be an outright ban on autonomous weapons systems. "We have to say where we want to draw the line and what we want to do -- and then get an international agreement," he said.
 
They want to make miniature Robert Patricks! One large one was enough!
There are alloys, known as memory metals, which are used in glasses and which can regain their shape. The difficulty in this case is all the other elements which need to be added to a device such as this, such as the circuitry and some form of system to propel it.
Click to expand...
But that is the whole problem isn't it? Interesting, but far from moving it from the realms of science fiction, it is still pie in the sky!
 
MolotovCocktail said:
The difference between the Skynet in Terminator series and the British Skynet was that the Skynet in Terminator had access to the United States Nuclear Arsenal and missile silos. The US has about 10000 nukes. The British have, what, about 200 at most? And those aren't even operational.

The other difference between the 2029 Skynet and British Skynet is that the one in Terminator had the programming and the chips to be self aware, whle the other one is just simply a telecommunications satalite.
Click to expand...

Little more than 200 it must be said, and who says they're not active? Heard of Tridant I am sure? Coincidence then that the UK was seeking to update the Tridant missile system because it was out of date? Anything but inactive, perhaps more active than ever before! just a note ^_^
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
W Looking for a story: Telephone network becomes conscious and falls in love (pre-internet, pre-skynet, when ATT ruled the world) Book Search 3

Similar threads


Back
Top