WaPo: A future for drones: Automated killing

[Elessar78]

The automated, unpiloted planes worked on their own, with no human guidance, no hand on any control.

After 20 minutes, one of the aircraft, carrying a computer that processed images from an onboard camera, zeroed in on the tarp and contacted the second plane, which flew nearby and used its own sensors to examine the colorful object. Then one of the aircraft signaled to an unmanned car on the ground so it could take a final, close-up look.

Target confirmed.

This successful exercise in autonomous robotics could presage the future of the American way of war: a day when drones hunt, identify and kill the enemy based on calculations made by software, not decisions made by humans.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/national-security/a-future-for-drones-automated-killing/2011/09/15/gIQAVy9mgK_story.html

What an awful direction for humanity to go. Literally, the inhumane acts of war will become just that.

[twa]

The same could be said for most advances in weapons.

Someone human still has to set them loose and designate a target.....until they start thinking for themselves

Is the the choice to kill or the weapon that is inhumane?

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

The same could be said for most advances in weapons.

Someone human still has to set them loose and designate a target.....until they start thinking for themselves

Is the the choice to kill or the weapon that is inhumane?

Yeah Japan actually banned guns in the 1800's for similar Reasons iirc.

I don't know. The drones have been super successful against al Qaeda and have arguably saved American Lives--as in no need for actual living, breathing soldiers to be put in harms way. Not really sure that this is any more inhumane than carpet bombing German cities from 20,000 feet.

[Destino]

If you're going to make one aspect of video games a reality (drones) why not add the computer AI (automation)? I'm not sure I agree this will lead to computers fighting wars all on their own as much as the writer seems to. I think this will streamline the amount of time the pilot and decision makers spend looking at nothing. If the drones identify targets and essentially collaborate to confirm and get into position that will allow pilots and decision makers to get pulled into the situation when they are needed. I'm sure you'll see other types of automation as well, especially defensive system which would play out a lot like a video game. Anything that they "see" that isn't supposed to be there in a hot zone is going to get attacked. Think of it as a guard dog terminator edition.

[twa]

Coming along nicely

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-auto-drone-20120126,0,740306.story

The Navy's new drone being tested near Chesapeake Bay stretches the boundaries of technology: It's designed to land on the deck of an aircraft carrier, one of aviation's most difficult maneuvers.

What's even more remarkable is that it will do that not only without a pilot in the ****pit, but without a pilot at all.

The X-47B marks a paradigm shift in warfare, one that is likely to have far-reaching consequences. With the drone's ability to be flown autonomously by onboard computers, it could usher in an era when death and destruction can be dealt by machines operating semi-independently.

Although humans would program an autonomous drone's flight plan and could override its decisions, the prospect of heavily armed aircraft screaming through the skies without direct human control is unnerving to many.

[Destino]

Drones have just started to appear. Right now they are still operating on the same designs and concepts created to support humans in the past. Planes, helicopters, and tanks. The cost per vehicle is still fairly high and the creativity is still somewhat inside the box. If they continue following the science fiction design curve they always seem to be on they'll eventually get a lot more unconventional and make some really crazy ****.

[Thiebear]

Although humans would program an autonomous drone's flight plan (For now) and could override its decisions(For now), the prospect of heavily armed aircraft screaming through the skies without direct human control is unnerving to many (While we still live above ground)

[JMS]

I think most people are entirely ignorant of the potential abuses automation and computers can exhibit. Ignorant of how quickly science fiction is becomeing common every day occurance. Ignorant of both what is happenning today and what is just over the horizon for unmanned automated systems capable of being deployed to support and replace the war fighters.

I find it fascinationg that our founding fathers wrote the third ammendment of the constitution which says the army can't force homeowners to board it's troops against their will.. But because our founding father couldn't imagine drones, we pretty much think anything imaginable is reasonable without any debate. Drones being used to kill without any independent review by the military in undeclaired war zones, or even peaceful zones outside those war zones. Now Drones being programmed to target and potentially dispatch people, autonomously..

Have no doubt that after this technology is perfected on foreigh shores, it will make apperences domestically... Police agencies and private security firms are already making use of drone technology.

[NoCalMike]

In Terminator, didn't it all start with "the first successful unman'd drone mission" or something like that, which led to the Gov't giving the defense contract to Skynet as it's main security intelligence company....and then, well....

[Skinz4Life12]

this is all i can think of

[HailGreen28]

[Jumbo]

UAV NEWS

'Autonomous' combat drones debated

Los Angeles (UPI) Jan 26, 2012

Researchers say a drone aircraft being tested by the U.S. Navy that could conduct a combat mission without human involvement raises troubling ethical questions. The drone, designed to land on the deck of an aircraft carrier, operates not only with no pilot in the ****pit but with no pilot at all, raising the specter of a pre-programmed semi-independently operating machine capable of wreaking mayhem on its own.

http://www.spacewar.com/uav.html

<more at link---photos too:)>

Killer drones get stealthy

(2010)

http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2010-07/20/killer-drones

Take the Avenger UCAV, unveiled last year by General Atomic Aeronautical Systems, the company behind the Predator and Reaper drones. With a 21.5-metre long fuselage and 20-metre wingspan, the Avenger is capable of staying in the air for up to 20 hours, and operating at up to 50,000 feet. Powered by a 2,200kg thrust Pratt & Whitney PW545B jet engine, it can fly at over 400 knots — 50 percent faster than the turboprop-powered Reaper unmanned plane, and more than three times as quick as the Predator.

General Atomics says the first Avenger is now flying two to three times a week. “Over the past 15-plus months, only one launch has been cancelled due to parts and/or maintenance,” the company notes in a statement. A second and third Avenger are now in production. It’ll be a little longer than the first -- 13.4 metres -- and able to haul a 2700kg payload. That’s a 50 percent improvement over what the Reaper can carry.

Most importantly, perhaps, is the shape of the Avenger. It’s designed to let radar signals away, without spotting the jet-powered drone. It’s not a full-blown stealth design, as Lew Page notes: there’s still a radar-catching sensor or two hanging from the undercarriage. But compared to the Reaper, which has missiles and bombs draped off of the wings, it’s a major step in the stealth direction.

<more at link>

[HailGreen28]

Not saying that drones aren't part of the future, but we should be mindful using them against first rate opponents.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/dec/08/authenticity-iran-captured-us-drone

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/iran-may-captured-u-stealth-drone-hacking-gps-030447469.html

'Course there's two types of drones. The expendable ones you don't care about losing. Perhaps the ideal drone. And the stealthy multi-role multi-million drones with cutting edge technology we hate losing. Guess which ones the US seems to prefer.

[twa]

The first U.S. Navy squadron combining the use of combat helicopters with unmanned drones is 'the future of warfare', officials have said.

The aircraft will be operated by a squadron of 140 sailors - called the 'Magicians' - who will work off coastal combat ships that are smaller and faster than destroyers and aircraft carriers.

The Fire Scout drone - which can be controlled by a pilot up to 110 miles away and can remain in the air for at least eight hours - will be for surveillance and target acquisition.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2318752/Drones-U-S-Navy-unveils-squadron-incorporating-controversial-unmanned-aircraft.html#ixzz2SKmol4dv

Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[Burgold]

Scary stuff. Interesting though that Drone pilots are experiencing the effects of PTSD in some studies. The more removed we get from killing the easier it is. At the moment, it seems to a number of these pilots this is not Ender's Game... not a video game, but very real. That's good.

Drones do worry me though from an ethical pov although to a degree a two star general I spoke with last week made an interesting point. In terms of being removed from the field how different is it being a drone pilot hundreds of miles away and a bomber pilot a mile up. Both are "safe" even though I argued that anytime you put a pilot in a plane there is an element of danger and risk whether from anti-aircraft or from simple mechanical malfunction.

[twa]

I thought the most interesting part is the tandem aspect.

rapidly expanding drone capabilities will change much and become integral,enhancing capabilities of the manned craft.....in some ways like satellite technology has,and cruise missiles

do you find cruise missiles as scary?

[Burgold]

I thought the most interesting part is the tandem aspect.

rapidly expanding drone capabilities will change much and become integral,enhancing capabilities of the manned craft.....in some ways like satellite technology has,and cruise missiles

do you find cruise missiles as scary?

I do think it falls under the same category as scary. I think the difference, though slight, is cruise missiles are one and done... where a drone can keep going after targets.

---------- Post added May-4th-2013 at 11:05 AM ----------

Mind you, I'd be happier if we all reverted to slings and arrows and barbed insults when we went to war. Killing is far too easy these days. Look how much damage just two radicalized monsters can do.

[twa]

the one and done only impacts costs though, the drones enable better real time choices/options

the choice to kill/not kill is enhanced by affordability/yet restrained by more options.

the deciders are what are scary,not the tool.....humans are a fearsome critter and yet awesome at times

[China]

Soon, Drones May Be Able to Make Lethal Decisions on Their Own

 

Scientists, engineers and policymakers are all figuring out ways drones can be used better and more smartly, more precise and less damaging to civilians, with longer range and better staying power. One method under development is by increasing autonomy on the drone itself.

 

Eventually, drones may have the technical ability to make even lethal decisions autonomously: to respond to a programmed set of inputs, select a target and fire their weapons without a human reviewing or checking the result. Yet the idea of the U.S. military deploying a lethal autonomous robot, or LAR, is sparking controversy. Though autonomy might address some of the current downsides of how drones are used, they introduce new downsides policymakers are only just learning to grapple with.

 

The basic conceit behind a LAR is that it can outperform and outthink a human operator. "If a drone's system is sophisticated enough, it could be less emotional, more selective and able to provide force in a way that achieves a tactical objective with the least harm," said Purdue University Professor Samuel Liles. "A lethal autonomous robot can aim better, target better, select better, and in general be a better asset with the linked ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] packages it can run."

 

Though the pace for drone strikes has slowed down -- only 21 have struck Pakistan in 2013, versus 122 in 2010 according to the New America Foundation -- unmanned vehicles remain a staple of the American counterinsurgency toolkit. But drones have built-in vulnerabilities that military planners still have not yet grappled with. Last year, for example, an aerospace engineer told the House Homeland Security Committee that with some inexpensive equipment he could hack into a drone and hijack it to perform some rogue purpose.

 

Drones have been hackable for years. In 2009, defense officials told reporters that Iranian-backed militias used $26 of off-the-shelf software to intercept the video feeds of drones flying over Iraq. And in 2011, it was reported that a virus had infected some drone control systems at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada, leading to security concerns about the security of unmanned aircraft.

 

It may be that the only way to make a drone truly secure is to allow it to make its own decisions without a human controller: if it receives no outside commands, then it cannot be hacked (at least as easily). And that's where LARs, might be the most attractive.

 

Though they do not yet exist, and are not possible with current technology, LARs are the subject of fierce debate in academia, the military and policy circles. Still, many treat their development as inevitability. But how practical would LARs be on the battlefield?

 

Click on the link for the full article

[twa]

 

. But how practical would LARs be on the battlefield?

 

Click on the link for the full article

 

About(probably more) as practical as fire and forget missiles or laser guided munitions ect have been.....in other words very

[Bang]

If anyone could use a good shooting, it's the people who are working to create this.

~Bang

[twa]

problem is it is not just us working on it.

 

repeating rifles against muzzle loaders metrics

[Bang]

I know,, it's inevitable anyway, always has been.

if someone can dream it, someone can do it.

With just about anything.. except time travel. 

That's right out.

 

~Bang

[visionary]

I know,, it's inevitable anyway, always has been.

if someone can dream it, someone can do it.

With just about anything.. except time travel. 

That's right out.

 

~Bang

Maybe we already created time travel and then someone went back in time and stopped it. 

[Bang]

But if we created time travel and someone went back and stopped it, maybe someone else went back after he got back to before he left and then went back to stop him from stopping it and then came back before he left to stop it, and stopped him from going back to before the other guy went back before he left, and then went back and stopped him from stopping what would cause him to stop stopping it?

 

 

~Bang