http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/ Engadget Comments for FireScout robot deathcopter passes engine testing http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_Loop ) any time soon. The first time a kid gets killed because of the decision of an armed robot? Heads will roll...]]>May 24th 2007 10:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/
LMAO. Extremely witty, I really like your writing style. Keep up the good work.]]>May 24th 2007 10:44PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/May 24th 2007 11:51PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/_____________
MP4 Converter
http://www.mp4-converter.net/]]>May 24th 2007 11:52PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/
Is America's idea to flood the future battlegrounds with "droids"? Its a good idea considering throwing robot after robot at our enemy's - killing them and maiming them while they defend against soul less hunks of metal would be quite DEMORALIZING but, I feel it would be quite disturbing considering the country with the most money to spend on the bots would be the country with the most devastating bot army.

]]>May 24th 2007 11:25PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/May 24th 2007 11:30PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/
...you mean a cruise missile?...]]>May 25th 2007 10:16AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/May 24th 2007 11:36PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/
Don't we already have that? It's called a Tomahawk.]]>May 24th 2007 11:42PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/
Ha ha! I just watched Terminator 2 last night.]]>May 24th 2007 11:56PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/May 25th 2007 12:20AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/May 25th 2007 12:23AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/May 25th 2007 1:55PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/Ok, or they are just degraded and moraly bankrupted? Heh, i wander what has become from once brave nation? Pathetic. The last sequel of this proto-droid will be probably some kind of "death-star", i guess?
And by the way, good writing style indeed.]]>May 25th 2007 4:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/
Besides, a defense based "Death Star" was proposed during the Cold War in 1983, called the Strategic Defense Initiative, or "Star Wars" for short was already considered. Though that exact plan wasn't executed, it's the basic footprint for the Missile Defense Agency we have now. Go figure.

Anything else you want to cop an attitude about that has nothing to do you in the first place?]]>May 25th 2007 8:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/
Come on, man. Why do you feel the need to provoke a pissing contest here?

Speaking of which, tell your cousin to pull his c*ck out of your a$$ so you can come pick up your mom -- b*itch has my j*zz all over her t*ts and she wet my bed....

Hope I don't get banned....]]>May 25th 2007 10:25AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/May 25th 2007 8:35AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/May 25th 2007 8:41AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/May 25th 2007 9:54AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/May 25th 2007 3:21PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/May 25th 2007 10:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/1. The very human cost of conflict should make a democratic government very cautious about entering into a war of any kind. Having this kind of technology would make the owning government far less concerned about the negative impact of going to war. In my opinion this is bad.
2. The very human involvement in a conflict - bearing in mind that each individual makes a moral judgement about the orders they receive and illegal orders cannot be acted upon - provides a number of safeguards against sub-standard behaviour by increasing the number of people who have to agree on something before it actually happens. Conversely this approach would concentrate power in very few people's hands. This is great if your leadership is incorruptible and respects every human's right to live the way they choose. Sadly, being human, this paves the way to a police state and dictatorship. If you have the ability to exterminate foreigners/gypsies/jews/gays/muslims/your own citizens/people you don't like (just to pick a few historical favourites) without witnesses or fear of retribution, then it's only a matter of time before somebody uses it.
3. These kind of things tend to be very expensive to develop, and one of the inevtiable ways of spreading the company's R&D cost and generating profits is to sell it to other governments. Think how useful these things would have been to Russia in Chechnya, the Sudanese in Darfur, just about everyone in Bosnia/Croatia/Kosovo and Rwanda... I could go on but you get the point. Consider for the moment each government who buys M-16s, or even flys F-16s, having access to this type of weaponry and the hairs on the back of your neck should stand up.

While I'm a great fan of cool gadgets, I believe that since 1945 we have enjoyed the longest period of peace between world powers in history. This peace has not been on the basis of mutual goodwill, but because of international agreements and an understanding that no government could attack another without suffering in return. Unilateral development of robotic warfare destabilises this balance and is not a course we should tread lightly.]]>May 26th 2007 7:09AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/http://www.engadget.com/2007/05/24/firescout-robot-deathcopter-passes-engine-testing/
if humans are controlling these things indefinitely, i see an enders game type of "social warfare" model arising in the next 50 years. who knows, maybe the cia watches you play splinter cell to pick future recruits. i don't pretend to have all of the answers to the new ethical issues, but putting all of your faith in humans or robots seems like a bad idea. there has to be a mid point.]]>Jul 20th 2007 8:12PM