Three Things That Have To Happen Before Robot Soldiers Hit The Battlefield
Patrick Tusker has an online article with the title above in this morning’s defenseone.com. He writes that DoD’s “Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Robot Challenge, which is trying to build a walking, climbing, humanoid robot for “disaster relief” operations, has inspired excitement, speculation, and anxiety about Terminator-style robots on the future battlefield.”
He notes that “the team leading the race is a Tokyo-based group called SCHAFT that was acquired by Google, not long after the Silicon Valley giant acquired Boston Dynamics, creator of Big Dog robot pack mule and the ALTAShumaniod. So, are Google and DARPA’s ushering the era of Skynet upon us? The short answer is: not anytime soon.” But, Mike Hoffman, in an online article in this morning’s DefenseTech.org, writes that “Google has chosen to forego any military funding from DARPA, in the development of next generation robots” — as the “stain” from the NSA leaks by Edward Snowden has dampened any desire by the company to closely associate with the Pentagon — in this area — at least for now.
Mr. Tucker writes that, “iRobot, a leading robotics company, isn’t in the competition, despite being in the business of supplying the U.S. military with fielded robots for the past two decades. iRobot is best known as the maker of Roomba robot vacuum cleaner, but their most famous defense system, the company’s flagship product, is the PackBot, a tiny tank machine with a long arm. PakBots were originally designed to handle explosive ordnance, and one of their machines was featured in the film Hurt Locker, fulfilling that role. Today, they also supply situational awareness to soldiers — who need to know what’s around the corner.”
“When asked if we’ll have humanoid robots wielding machine guns in 15 years,” Chris Jones, Director of Strategic Technology at iRobot, laughed and called the “question a hard one to answer.” But, he pointed out some visible milestones between where we are now; and, that destination.
Marching Robots Need To Get Smarter
Mr. Tucker observes, “the military’s success with armed, flying drones like the Predator, doesn’t necessarily foretell a bright future for ‘gun-toting, walking robots. Keeping a machine airborne isn’t as difficult as getting a robot to navigate a 3-D, terrestrial environment such as a field, cluttered with debris, or a bombed-out building — where the chances for mishap are far higher — especially when you introduce live ammunition into the mix.” There are also “technical and systems challenges in terms of targeting,” Jones said. “It speaks to an increased bar for robustness and safety,” for ground-roving bots,” he added.
“These systems will also have to become [much] more independent, requiring much less direct operator-control, if they are to be useful on the battlefield,” says Mr. Jones. “The bots in the DARPA Challenge aren’t all that autonomous. There’s a [person] in the loop controlling at a lower bandwidth than might have previously been possible; but, there’s still a [person] directly in the loop.”
The Military Actually Has To Start Talking About Arming Ground Robots
When it comes to the question of arming ground robots, Mr. Jones says “there has been no focused, near-term dialogue on this type of topic,” despite the Army’s increasing use of PackBots in the past decade.
You Will Probably See Hummanoid Civilian Robots, Before You See ‘Battle Bots’
“Cost is a key barrier to future — robot — infantrymen,” says Mr. Jones. “If Google was able to put humanoid robots into civilian settings, it would probably drive down the costs to operate those sorts of systems. And, that would make them more attractive to the military,” said Jones. Having said all that, author and futurist P.W. Singer has a different take.
An Amazing Revolution Is Taking Place On The Battlefield
Pete W. Singer, author of “Conflict In The 21st Century,” persuasively argues that “an amazing revolution is taking place on the battlefield. “Remote controlled drones take out terrorists in Afghanistan, while the number of unmanned systems on the ground in Iraq (2009) went from zero to 12K in the last five years.” “But, this is only the start,” he says, “as military officers acknowledge that new prototypes will soon make human fighter pilots obsolete, while the Pentagon searches for tiny robots the size of flies to carry our reconnaissance work, now handled by special forces troops.” One can envision a stealth drone “mother-ship” flying at the edges of space carrying two other drones — each of lesser size — to carry out and conduct targeted killing; and/or, targeted intelligence collection and surveillance.
Science-fiction on the battlefield is becoming more of a reality he says. “Something big is happening on the battlefield today and maybe in the history of humanity itself. The U.S. military went into the war in Iraq — with a handful of airborne drones — we now have (2009) 5,300. We went in with zero unmanned ground systems, we now have 12K. The tech-term “killer app” takes on a whole new meaning in this space.” And, he says, “we need to remember that we’re talking the Model T-Ford (in terms of where we are on the battlefield now; and, the Wright flyers — compared to what is coming soon.” Tens of thousands of armed robots is where we’re headed in future war/s,” says Mr. Singer. “In 25yrs. if Moore’s Law holds true, those robots will be close to 1B times more powerful than their computing power today. The things we only used to see in science-fiction movies — now need to be discussed in the halls of power,” he argues. “A Robot Revolution is Upon Us!”
“When historians look at this period,” he argues, “they may well call this a Revolution In War timeframe — maybe even more profound, than the creation of the atomic bomb during WWII. Every previous signature period of war, be it the French Long-Bow, the machine-gun, and even the atomic bomb — was about shooting faster, launching further, have a bigger boom, etc. That’s certainly the case with robotics — he argues — but, they also change the nature and character of the war itself — and even the very identity of the warrior. Another way of putting this he says, is that mankind’s 5000 year monopoly on how wars are fought — is breaking down.”
“The future of war,” he argues, even a robotic one — isn’t going to be a purely American one. The U.S. is clearly the global leader in the technological race with respect to robotic warfare; but, with technology — there is no such thing as permanent, first-mover advantage, he argues. “The British and the French invented the tank; but, it was the Germans who perfected its use. Forty-three other countries are also developing robot warriors. Given the state of mathematics and science education in our schools, as well as the state of our manufacturing — how do we move forward and maintain our competitive advantage in this space?,” he asks. The cross between the use of robots in war and in acts of terrorism — is going to be fascinating — and, disturbing,” he notes. We are likely to see the expansion of the use of robots by terrorists — a blending he says — of al Qaeda 2.0 and the Unabomber.
The increased use of robots is also making the decision to engage militarily “easier” he argues (something I am also bothered by), blinding us to the “true costs” that war — at least up till now — imposes. “The ability to watch more; but, experience less — puts a wrinkle in the relationship between the those using the technology and those on the receiving end. How does the increased use of drones play out in the battle of ideas with radical groups like al Qaeda?, he asks. What is the message we think we are sending with these machines, versus what is being received — in terms of the message? “As one Lebanese journalist put it to Mr. Singer, “this is just another sign of the cold-hearted, cruel, U.S. and Israeli’s who are cowards, because they send out machines to fight us — they don’t want to fight us like real men — because they are afraid to fight. So, we just have to kill a few of their soldiers to defeat them.”
Lots to ponder and think about here. V/R, RCP
No comments:
Post a Comment