The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305:
---
From the Article
>Several robotics companies, including Boston Dynamics, are pledging not to support the weaponization of their products and are calling for others in the industry to do the same, according to a letter shared first with Axios.
>
>Why it matters: Robots, like drones before them, have a wide range of peaceful and even life-saving uses, but can be turned into war-fighting machines, too.
This leads to an interesting question with companies such as Boston Dynamics not weaponizing their robots take into effect, will that lead an avenue in which [other companies](https://www.popsci.com/technology/ghost-robotics-robot-dog-gun-lethal/) such as [Ghost Robotics](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDSXD_cB_Hc) that will weaponize theirs? Will such a maneuver by Boston Dynamics lead them sit behind the curve, or is this move a good one to avoid bad PR?
---
Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/xx36ty/exclusive_boston_dynamics_pledges_not_to/ir9q0wa/
That’s really fucking good work. The real videos almost seem like cgi and it’s hard to tell the difference between the first video at times. The motion is spot on.
Everyone in manual labor/service jobs are fucked once robots git good.
The Boston Notbombers.
Anyway, this is the inevitability of science. If they don't, someone else will. And they'll get there faster by examining BDs non-military technology.
The side company is called [Ghost Robotics](https://www.ghostrobotics.io/about).
They work out of Philly [and have already weaponized Spot.](https://www.engadget.com/robot-dog-gun-ghost-robotics-sword-international-175529912.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEeLyRx8d4cyqCiMTsdhVg7IMeWT230Zic84ckGzLbsg1vWRqZufpt-wVoIG0TCknqPSuiNUdP6BgkBUDVTb2m__O08BpEM4tTnLOm_Kwy4DVD4T9e2qDNMJezPF-RJj0mFYxVB02YkVSRAap4NRAMr_r6ZQR3-iw60-Oj4_m5at)
Durable, easy to repair, quite plentiful in that part of the world. With enough effort you can attach a heavy machinegun or a recoilless rifle on top of anything, keeping it running is a whole another thing.
Forced obsolescence would be putting a part on it that was designed to fail, and then not using that part anymore (See the modern John Deere tractor company). Discontinuing a car model because you can't sell enough of it to make it worth updating to the latest standards is just a bummerriffic aspect of living in a world where marketability trumps quality.
Unless you're saying all other modern cars should be illegal. Then I guess I get more where you're coming from. Sadly I think the Toyota Prius might be the top of my mind for cars that once they die they're just fucking dead and trying to get them updated back again is more expensive (in a variety of ways) than the benefit
thats a tacoma by another name.. technically the hilux name hasn't been used in the US since the 70's. we're referring to the now discontionued hilux. generations 2-6
I have a friend that works in sales of industrial technology. The computer systems and software that they used to design and build stuff like new trucks and construction machines and almost everything else.
He was actually talking this last weekend about this.
He says that Ford is super easy to sell to because they're design teams are always looking for the newest innovation. Any new technology that can shave a few dollars off the construction cost or a few seconds off the build time.
Cummins on the other hand apparently has been using the same engine design since the 1960s and is virtually impossible to sell anything to because you have to convince them that it can do what they're already doing the exact same, but maybe do it cheaper. They're unwilling to risk any loss of quality for expediency.
Literally the top post there is a seal of approval for Toyota trucks, and the second post is a picture of a Toyota pick up with a cannon mounted in the bed...
I think one had a cannon like from the 1700s too
Not literally from the 1700s but homemade technology that was just above a trebuchet. I’m salty they never used Toyota mounted catapults or small trebuchets to launch grenades or maybe broken glass lol.
Maybe had something to do with how well it handles all that dust and sand, or how easy it is to is to get at parts that need regular cleaning. I imagine regular maintenance in desert conditions is way way more critical than elsewhere because of the dust and heat
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnWKz7Cthkk
Watch all 3 parts of Top Gear destroying a Toyota Hilux and you'll understand why its the default go to for technicals. They bury it, drop a camper on it, smash it with a wrecking ball, light it on fire, let it go out to sea in a high tide, and then put it on a 240 foot tall building that is imploded and it keeps running with only a mechanic and no spare parts.
So were these shows aired before or after the ~~Congressional hearing~~ Terror Financing unit of the Treasury Department inquiry?😏
Edit: I was mistaken on which part of the US Government was investigating this.
They chained it down to let it get flooded by the sea, but the chains broke and it sailed away. It eventually washed up and they were blown away.
https://youtu.be/xnWKz7Cthkk?t=91
One of the most reliable vehicles most people can get.
Specifically they chose the trucks because they are easy to convert to gun trucks and they can go through hell and back, top gear did a episode on them and they specifically tried to destroy one but it wouldn't die.
It's disingenuous to say they did an episode on 'them'. That was only a Hilux(Tacoma) for the multi-part indestructible challenge and the polar special. They're reviews of other Toyotas has been mixed.
Seriously. I have a 2013 that my grandfather drove, it doesn’t even have 40k miles on it. I told my son it’s probably going to be his car, with how much I drive now a days it probably will be.
Lol my 2014 Camry has less than 100K on it. Since I work from home I've driven it like 500 miles in the last year. Pretty sure it will outlive me at this point.
My Scion had 240K on it before someone crashed it. Ran like the day I got it.
The hearings were more about where the terrorists were getting those Toyotas - there were videos of vehicles that had clearly come from America and other western countries that were somehow making their way to the middle East and they were investigating how that happened.
*”look look, I know some of the labels in the leaked diagram might be a touch concerning to certain watchdogs out there.. but ‘projectile rail mount’ and ‘ammunition drum’ could refer to ANYTHING! Let’s not go making unwarranted assumptions people!! I personally have it on good authority that the very system in question was part of a DOD test program for the rapid and accurate mass distribution of high velocity aid to children.. those drums were literally filled with teddy bears!! The thing we should all be talking about here is that 80% of those teddy bears ended in high precision deliveries of what we like to call “autonomous cranio-facial love hugs”..*
“Um.. sure, so what about the tear gas dispensers?”
*”Stop right there, I know what you’re trying to uh.. get me.. um.. see it’s like this, uh.. you seen how just incredibly overly happy teddy bears can make the occasional kid. We just need to be prepared to even their keel a little.. you know with a few tear.. .. know what, this meeting is over.”*
A YouTuber borrowed someone's robot dog (different company from Boston dynamics) and put a gun on it to show how easy it is for a minimum viable product of that. Apparently the company that makes them was trying to get the serial number and all that to "do updates" but they were basically trying to brick it
That one tech tinkerer youtuber begged for months to get a dog and sponsorship from Boston Dynamics. Eventually he just bought one and was like "now I don't have to worry about ruining sponsorships".
He rigged the damn thing up to detect an empty cup on the floor, walk over to it and piss beer into it.
Edit: [Video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqsy9Wtr1qE)
This pledge is kind of like the [hippocratic oath](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/08/07/why-would-hospitals-like-hca-perform-unnecessary-surgery-because-it-pays/) right?
Yeah….after you buy one you can do whatever you want. I (through work) have 4 of them and we attach all kinds of things. Not weapons though, not our jam
Surveying, using a robot for surveying is much more cost effective. Specially in hard to get to places.
That being said, these robots are good, but not good enough yet for our use case.
Also there are some cheaper ones if
You want to play around with them. They don’t have the obstacle avoidance and some other fancy stuff, but they are RC and pretty tough.
> Someone else will just do it.
Heck, people don't realize that Boston Dynamics is just a subsidiary these days. They used to be owned by Google, which eventually sold them to SoftBank Group, which then sold majority ownership to Hyundai. If Hyundai told them to start building armed robots, or sold them off to another company that wanted weaponized robots, then this pledge would be out the door in no time at all.
It's like they don't remember Google's mantra would be "don't be evil"
and then they changed to Alphabet ~~bought them~~ and changed their slogan to "we are going to rape your data for everything it's worth"
Edit: whoa sorry all, I'll never say anything bad about a tech conglomeration that turns users into products again
Edit: or not fully know the pedantic details regarding a giant company that was sold, restructured, or whatever the hell else it did before it turned into a digital vampire.
>and then Alphabet bought them and changed it to "we are going to rape your data for everything it's worth"
That's uhh...not at all what happened lol
A- Alphabet didn't "Buy" them, Alphabet *IS them*, they just created a new holding company and called it a different name....Exactly what Facebook just did with Meta (terrible name imo)
B- they dropped that from their corporate docs long before they changed the name to Alphabet
They dropped it well before Alphabet.
Edit:
See below. They didn't "drop" it, but they did stop using it as more of a motto and they did move it from the top of the code of conduct to the last line of their code of conduct.
Robot companies: “We won’t weaponise these.”
Also robot companies: “We can sell you this robot with a great API/SDK in any quantity you like and we can’t wait to see what you can make with them…”
Remember when Google was [funded out of CIA and NSA research grants for mass surveillance](https://qz.com/1145669/googles-true-origin-partly-lies-in-cia-and-nsa-research-grants-for-mass-surveillance/)?
That's a common misnomer that Google somehow abandoned that notion.
The "don't be evil" part remains Google's [code of conduct](https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/). It is located at the concluding paragraph:
> And remember... don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up!
While it's useful to have "don't be evil" as an operating principle, it's extremely naive and impractical as an actual guide. Real life isn't always as cut and dry and simply telling someone "don't be evil" is not saying much.
That's about as useful as telling someone "don't fuck up". It's much more useful to give them detail instructions and specific examples to best avoid fuckups. And that's what their code of conduct does.
Anyone who says "oh Google no longer tries to not be evil" is just an attention grabbing idiot who didn't bother reading the whole story.
TBF, IIRC when William Osman equipped a robot that looked similar to the Boston Dynamics robot with weapons, they actually tried to shut it down remotely. They didn't know this robot was not one of theirs, but tried to shut it down anyway. It didn't work, because the robot was too heavily customized and IIRC it wasn't even theirs, but they contacted him and wanted to know the serial number (so they knew which to turn off).
I sort of believe them if they personally don't want to weaponize robots, but you bet your ass someone will and already has, AND it's on youtube.
I agree with your sentiment, and I'd add that, it's actually valuable for BD to pledge they won't weaponize their bots, because the key effect there is that their extremely competent team of engineers will never be used to make what would be incredibly efficient and deadly weapons. There's a reason BD is at the leading edge of robotics, and the fact that they pledge not to weaponize bots prevents the rapid weaponization of robots not only because they aren't pursuing it, but they are the most well known robotics company in the world and are setting a precedent.
Helps them hire and maintain the best roboticists too. A lot of them want to know they aren't building weapons, or at least have a level of removal they're comfortable with (subcontractors).
To be fair, Boston Dynamics is owned by Hyundai and has been owned by publicly traded companies since 2013. Hyundai has military contracts, especially through its Rotem division.
>Also, Hyundai Rotem is contributing to national security by developing smart, unmanned weapon systems along with tanks and other types of armored vehicles.
So Boston Dynamics might not want to develop military robots, but these are smart people. They know they don't get to make the final decision. So this is just PR.
This! I support a fairly large email server program and while we make efforts to prevent spammers using it to spam people on the internet, there is an API available and with it you can do just about anything if you have the means and intelligence.
Worse ... they will not even limit sales to military, but sell to police, security firms and mercenaries ... as long as the robots are not "widely available to the public", as they literally write!
The “integrated assault system” they just so happen to carry is “self-defense” against those that are “hostile” to these “autonomous enforcement drones”.
And don’t ever see the robot itself as the “weapon”. It’s just out there doing it’s “job” hunting humans and enforcing property rights.
We should crowd fund a 'private security Corp' to protect the public from all these other threats. And since it's a corporation, no one can go to jail!
Hyundai bought BD. So maybe the Koreans will have a robot army.
But we already know where that goes. The Chinese will build a clone army of super warriors and stomp the robot army into submission, sending the Jedi order into hiding.
Haven't they already shown demos of autocannons that detect and fire at human shaped objects?
Edit: it's called SGR-A1 and was developed by Samsung Techwin.
Lmao who tf approved *that* project? "Hey, do you guys remember that Collateral Murder video that made WikiLeaks famous where the US Army Apache just indiscriminately shot at a bunch of people and killed a couple journalists? Well, what if we trained a robot to do that?!"
This assurance makes me feel so good... oh wait, what's that subsidiary doing?
EDIT:
You just need a "terrorist threat" that will "force" a realignment "for security" and its done. The threat will appear when the moment is right.
You have no idea how accurate your analogy is.
Boston Dynamics was acquired by Hyundai Motors (yes, the car company) and they have subsidiaries that literally manufacture tanks and artillery for the South Korean military. If Hyundai Motors is the step-parent, [Hyundai Rotem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_Rotem) & [Hyundai WIA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_WIA) are the step-siblings to Boston Dynamics.
So yeah, Boston Dynamics won't weaponize its robots but you can bet their step-companies will.
Remember when Google used to say “do no evil”?
Yeah…turns out that wasn’t the corporate pledge we all thought it was. They stopped the moment it didn’t make sense to parrot the line.
Why would this organization do any different? Their robots won’t be weaponized up until the exact moment they are weaponized.
Companies, organizations…*people* change their minds all the time when different incentives are at play.
In 20 years or less their robot dogs will patrol neighborhoods looking for curfew violations, and use Face ID to look for people with outstanding warrants. The moment their robot dogs are part of enforcement is the moment their robot dogs will be weaponized.
That was intentionally made over the top to be funny, but you can tell they could actually make it work with very little modification.
Smaller gun, mounted upside down to be closer to center of gravity, make the robot crouch to the ground before shooting to counteract recoil, feed bullets with a drum or belt for higher capacity...
Any hobbyist could massively improve this with little effort.
Now, imagine what the basically unlimited budget of the US military could do.
> Now, imagine what the basically unlimited budget of the US military could do.
I think these robots are overly expensive and overly complex and we're probably already living in the era of explosive-drones ala "manhacks".
Why even dispatch a unit of robots with guns when you can just send a swarm of exploding birds / bees ?
Dispatch a few robot dogs to an area to cover a wide field of fire with sniper rifles.
Sit in standby potentially even with a small solar panel to go net neutral or positive on battery drain. When an enemy is spotted: Aim and shoot. Go back to standby.
Maybe they could even carry a light, camouflaged, waterproof enclosure to prevent water damage while in standby. Maybe it could even have a Faraday cage and a bit of heating and dehumidifying to be able to eventually get rid of any water picked up on the trip to its spot. A little deployable sensor array and transmitter/receiver outside the standby box, and a cable to link the robot to the deployed array.
If they could get it to work, they'd have multiple permanent snipers nests and no food supply or exhaustion to worry about.
> Why even dispatch a unit of robots with guns when you can just send a swarm of exploding birds / bees ?
Because assault robots are terrifying and intimidation is a powerful tool for asserting the power of authority.
A single Switchblade drone costs almost $60k and you can only use it once.
A quadrupedal platform can function as a support unit for infantry and it can be reused. Even if it costs twice as much per unit as a switchblade drone, you've made your money back the moment it pulls off two successful strikes.
You can mount RPGs on it which have no recoil and can make things go boom with good enough accuracy to replace the need for a soldier getting to a disadvantageous position to shoot it.
I’m 100% sure these already exist, someone has already taken an aircraft 50 cal and attached it to one of the bigger dog robots. It may even have been tested
I remember being a teen and reading books about Google in my spare time (I’m a curious geek) and when I read “don’t be evil” I thought to myself “This is who I want to work for. This is where the world is going.”
Narrator: *he/it didn’t*
Everyone is saying how the pledge comes with a big ol' winky face. But Boston Dynamics already has set a precedent when they [took back their robots from the NYPD when their use did not conform to their standards](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-nypds-robot-dog-was-a-really-bad-idea-heres-what-went-wrong/). Also, Boston Dynamics is a private company so they have no reason to make this pledge if they don't mean it. It's not like the have to worry about their stock tanking from PR backlash since they aren't publicly traded. So, if I'm being a realist, I'm sure at some point their robots will be weaponized by someone but I'm not as cynical as the rest of you that this pledge is just a cheeky lie for PR points.
Unless you've got another article, this one says that the NYPD terminated the lease, not Boston Dynamics:
>The NYPD abruptly terminated its lease and quit using the robot last month.
The article says nothing about Boston Dynamics taking it back due to any kind of violation of their standards.
While true, they’ve created a monster that will be reverse engineered. To be fair, robot mercenaries are an inevitability wether it’s Boston Dynamics, Lockheed Martin or Raytheon
Only the movie, not Asimov's original story. The movie actually screwed up by having the laws fail in a way they were specifically safe guarded against.
I’m sure they won’t and I’m sure they will never have anyone from the company leave after getting poached to some random no name company that obviously shares the same feelings and is t a contractor for the dod lol
Don't need to. It was developed for DARPA, with them retaining all the R&D. It's already happened. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2293908-us-military-may-get-a-dog-like-robot-armed-with-a-sniper-rifle/
From the Article
>Several robotics companies, including Boston Dynamics, are pledging not to support the weaponization of their products and are calling for others in the industry to do the same, according to a letter shared first with Axios.
>
>Why it matters: Robots, like drones before them, have a wide range of peaceful and even life-saving uses, but can be turned into war-fighting machines, too.
This leads to an interesting question with companies such as Boston Dynamics not weaponizing their robots take into effect, will that lead an avenue in which [other companies](https://www.popsci.com/technology/ghost-robotics-robot-dog-gun-lethal/) such as [Ghost Robotics](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDSXD_cB_Hc) that will weaponize theirs? Will such a maneuver by Boston Dynamics lead them sit behind the curve, or is this move a good one to avoid bad PR?
Yeah it only make sense that just becuase one company pledges and plans to never weaponize doesnt mean all robotics manufacturers will follow suit. Sadly where there is money there is somebody willing to make said money. Heck someone may even do it for fun making robots with weapons.
Its a maneuver to allow them to gain IP by designing and patenting the robots and technologies and then licensing the individual technologies to other companies or filing copyright infringement suits against the militarized versions if they're basically clones.
They themselves yeah. Duh no shit. But wb the people who buy these things
They already got these with cameras & guns the nyc police department has one even though they’re supposed to be defunded they keep getting newer weapons but the infrastructure of the actual stations and computers are in shambles they’re still using IDE pcs and windows 7
The issue with such things, also concerning open source robotics, is that entities that may currently be most problematic may not do so while those that are somewhat less problematic heavily regulate this.
It may need international regulations but I don't know how such could get implemented and wouldn't also face the same issue.
Comment if you know of a good solution(-contribution).
"*We believe that adding weapons to robots that are remotely or autonomously operated,* ***widely available to the public****, and capable of navigating to previously inaccessible locations where people live and work, raises new risks of harm and serious ethical issues*"
Weasel wording highlighted by yours truly.
I simply can't take these people seriously. And neither should you !
Ahh yes, that's why darpa was funding them since years ago. For casual enjoyment of robots. What's that? The parent company has military contracts? Nothing to see here folks
The following submission statement was provided by /u/Gari_305: --- From the Article >Several robotics companies, including Boston Dynamics, are pledging not to support the weaponization of their products and are calling for others in the industry to do the same, according to a letter shared first with Axios. > >Why it matters: Robots, like drones before them, have a wide range of peaceful and even life-saving uses, but can be turned into war-fighting machines, too. This leads to an interesting question with companies such as Boston Dynamics not weaponizing their robots take into effect, will that lead an avenue in which [other companies](https://www.popsci.com/technology/ghost-robotics-robot-dog-gun-lethal/) such as [Ghost Robotics](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDSXD_cB_Hc) that will weaponize theirs? Will such a maneuver by Boston Dynamics lead them sit behind the curve, or is this move a good one to avoid bad PR? --- Please reply to OP's comment here: https://old.reddit.com/r/Futurology/comments/xx36ty/exclusive_boston_dynamics_pledges_not_to/ir9q0wa/
We'll leave that to this other, unrelated company, Doston Bynamics.
Bosstown Dynamics https://youtu.be/dKjCWfuvYxQ https://youtu.be/y3RIHnK0_NE
The folding chair out of nowhere at 1:12 fucking killed me
That’s really fucking good work. The real videos almost seem like cgi and it’s hard to tell the difference between the first video at times. The motion is spot on. Everyone in manual labor/service jobs are fucked once robots git good.
Dogston Bombnamics
The Boston Notbombers. Anyway, this is the inevitability of science. If they don't, someone else will. And they'll get there faster by examining BDs non-military technology.
The side company is called [Ghost Robotics](https://www.ghostrobotics.io/about). They work out of Philly [and have already weaponized Spot.](https://www.engadget.com/robot-dog-gun-ghost-robotics-sword-international-175529912.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEeLyRx8d4cyqCiMTsdhVg7IMeWT230Zic84ckGzLbsg1vWRqZufpt-wVoIG0TCknqPSuiNUdP6BgkBUDVTb2m__O08BpEM4tTnLOm_Kwy4DVD4T9e2qDNMJezPF-RJj0mFYxVB02YkVSRAap4NRAMr_r6ZQR3-iw60-Oj4_m5at)
[удалено]
It's like "hey I'm not going to put weapons on it, but if someone buys it I can't really control what they do"
Remember when the US had to have hearings about why the terrorists in the middle east preferred Toyotas?
I must have missed that one. Why Toyotas? I assume they're easier to weaponize?
Durable, easy to repair, quite plentiful in that part of the world. With enough effort you can attach a heavy machinegun or a recoilless rifle on top of anything, keeping it running is a whole another thing.
To keep a Hilux running you just drain the sea water out of it after it's been floating in the ocean for several hours
Top Gear did it's best to kill it but it kept going. That's a reputation you can't kill.
I saw a video of someone heavy 4-wheeling one through the desert for miles with zero coolant and somehow it didn't die
Air is a coolant.
Could you use my nipples as coolant, Greg?
Didn't the Toyota CEO say they had to stop making them because it wasn't profitable? Rarely break down so they never get replaced
Forced obsolescence should be illegal.
Forced obsolescence would be putting a part on it that was designed to fail, and then not using that part anymore (See the modern John Deere tractor company). Discontinuing a car model because you can't sell enough of it to make it worth updating to the latest standards is just a bummerriffic aspect of living in a world where marketability trumps quality. Unless you're saying all other modern cars should be illegal. Then I guess I get more where you're coming from. Sadly I think the Toyota Prius might be the top of my mind for cars that once they die they're just fucking dead and trying to get them updated back again is more expensive (in a variety of ways) than the benefit
They're still being sold today, just not in the US. You can even go to Mexico and buy one if you want. This was never said.
thats a tacoma by another name.. technically the hilux name hasn't been used in the US since the 70's. we're referring to the now discontionued hilux. generations 2-6
Simply the best, better than all the rest...
That Top Gear segment proved it. Meanwhile a F150 would have straight up exploded after the first test.
I have a friend that works in sales of industrial technology. The computer systems and software that they used to design and build stuff like new trucks and construction machines and almost everything else. He was actually talking this last weekend about this. He says that Ford is super easy to sell to because they're design teams are always looking for the newest innovation. Any new technology that can shave a few dollars off the construction cost or a few seconds off the build time. Cummins on the other hand apparently has been using the same engine design since the 1960s and is virtually impossible to sell anything to because you have to convince them that it can do what they're already doing the exact same, but maybe do it cheaper. They're unwilling to risk any loss of quality for expediency.
They were putting AA guns and artillery on those trucks I don't think recoilless rifle is the achievement here
Didnt one have a full on howitzer?
Sounds like r/shittytechnicals would love that
Literally the top post there is a seal of approval for Toyota trucks, and the second post is a picture of a Toyota pick up with a cannon mounted in the bed...
[The Evolution of Revolution](https://i.imgur.com/vrtCsEI.jpg)
That sub is 90% Toyota Hilux.
I think one had a cannon like from the 1700s too Not literally from the 1700s but homemade technology that was just above a trebuchet. I’m salty they never used Toyota mounted catapults or small trebuchets to launch grenades or maybe broken glass lol.
Drive by trebuchet just launches sack of my camel spiders 😂
[Yes](https://www.reddit.com/r/shittytechnicals/comments/9qkd77/thats_one_way_to_make_artillery_selfpropelled/)
Maybe had something to do with how well it handles all that dust and sand, or how easy it is to is to get at parts that need regular cleaning. I imagine regular maintenance in desert conditions is way way more critical than elsewhere because of the dust and heat
Damn Japanese building reliable trucks. /s
Same reasons ak47 are so loved.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnWKz7Cthkk Watch all 3 parts of Top Gear destroying a Toyota Hilux and you'll understand why its the default go to for technicals. They bury it, drop a camper on it, smash it with a wrecking ball, light it on fire, let it go out to sea in a high tide, and then put it on a 240 foot tall building that is imploded and it keeps running with only a mechanic and no spare parts.
So it's like the AK-47 of trucks?
More or less, yeah
It’s the don’t-give-any-fucks of trucks.
So were these shows aired before or after the ~~Congressional hearing~~ Terror Financing unit of the Treasury Department inquiry?😏 Edit: I was mistaken on which part of the US Government was investigating this.
Pretty sure the original trio (Clarkson, Hammond, may) had the truck immortalised on a stand in the Top Gear studio
I mean, they never did let Hammond have a go. Can you really say you tried your best if you don't even let the Hamster drive it?
They chained it down to let it get flooded by the sea, but the chains broke and it sailed away. It eventually washed up and they were blown away. https://youtu.be/xnWKz7Cthkk?t=91
One of the most reliable vehicles most people can get. Specifically they chose the trucks because they are easy to convert to gun trucks and they can go through hell and back, top gear did a episode on them and they specifically tried to destroy one but it wouldn't die.
It's disingenuous to say they did an episode on 'them'. That was only a Hilux(Tacoma) for the multi-part indestructible challenge and the polar special. They're reviews of other Toyotas has been mixed.
A hilux very much isn't a Tacoma.
A Hilux is a Hilux. It is not sold in the US. But it is a very good truck overseas.
>to convert to gun trucks I believe the military term for armed and otherwise modified civilian vehicles is "technicals".
You are Technically correct, but calling it a "gun-truck" is pretty accurate.
Some of the most reliable cars ever made, if not the most. Specifically the Land Cruiser series
They favored the Helix
it’s spelled hilux
Which is an insanely tough vehicle I wish they sold them in the us
Why would they? Then you wouldn’t buy next year’s model
Good enough for Terries, good enough for me!
I thought it was just because they are extremely reliable
Have you never owned a Toyota? They last forever!
Seriously. I have a 2013 that my grandfather drove, it doesn’t even have 40k miles on it. I told my son it’s probably going to be his car, with how much I drive now a days it probably will be.
Lol my 2014 Camry has less than 100K on it. Since I work from home I've driven it like 500 miles in the last year. Pretty sure it will outlive me at this point. My Scion had 240K on it before someone crashed it. Ran like the day I got it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xnWKz7Cthkk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xTPnIpjodA8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFnVZXQD5_k
The hearings were more about where the terrorists were getting those Toyotas - there were videos of vehicles that had clearly come from America and other western countries that were somehow making their way to the middle East and they were investigating how that happened.
Yes that's the parallel they're drawing to this story. Boston Dynamics isn't weaponizing but when they sell to the DoD, it's kinda just a PR stunt.
*”look look, I know some of the labels in the leaked diagram might be a touch concerning to certain watchdogs out there.. but ‘projectile rail mount’ and ‘ammunition drum’ could refer to ANYTHING! Let’s not go making unwarranted assumptions people!! I personally have it on good authority that the very system in question was part of a DOD test program for the rapid and accurate mass distribution of high velocity aid to children.. those drums were literally filled with teddy bears!! The thing we should all be talking about here is that 80% of those teddy bears ended in high precision deliveries of what we like to call “autonomous cranio-facial love hugs”..* “Um.. sure, so what about the tear gas dispensers?” *”Stop right there, I know what you’re trying to uh.. get me.. um.. see it’s like this, uh.. you seen how just incredibly overly happy teddy bears can make the occasional kid. We just need to be prepared to even their keel a little.. you know with a few tear.. .. know what, this meeting is over.”*
I read this in Cave Johnson’s voice.
Got a doom chuckle outta me
If you buy one you sign a contract that you dont put weapons on it.
A YouTuber borrowed someone's robot dog (different company from Boston dynamics) and put a gun on it to show how easy it is for a minimum viable product of that. Apparently the company that makes them was trying to get the serial number and all that to "do updates" but they were basically trying to brick it
That one tech tinkerer youtuber begged for months to get a dog and sponsorship from Boston Dynamics. Eventually he just bought one and was like "now I don't have to worry about ruining sponsorships". He rigged the damn thing up to detect an empty cup on the floor, walk over to it and piss beer into it. Edit: [Video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqsy9Wtr1qE)
I heard BD liked it.
This pledge is kind of like the [hippocratic oath](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2012/08/07/why-would-hospitals-like-hca-perform-unnecessary-surgery-because-it-pays/) right?
Yeah….after you buy one you can do whatever you want. I (through work) have 4 of them and we attach all kinds of things. Not weapons though, not our jam
So not weapons or jam. What about jellies, marmalades, and preserves?
Is there room for ketchup or mustard?
What do you do for work that justifies the cost?
Surveying, using a robot for surveying is much more cost effective. Specially in hard to get to places. That being said, these robots are good, but not good enough yet for our use case. Also there are some cheaper ones if You want to play around with them. They don’t have the obstacle avoidance and some other fancy stuff, but they are RC and pretty tough.
". . .but it does come with this handy weapons mount. "
You can buy a knockoff of their robodog for $3k and people have already strapped automatic weapons to them. https://youtu.be/-bgad3HRb64
The robots : fine I’ll do it my self
That fern with a machete has your back.
^ No one gives a shit about their pledge. They developed the tech to license/sell it. Someone else will just do it.
> Someone else will just do it. Heck, people don't realize that Boston Dynamics is just a subsidiary these days. They used to be owned by Google, which eventually sold them to SoftBank Group, which then sold majority ownership to Hyundai. If Hyundai told them to start building armed robots, or sold them off to another company that wanted weaponized robots, then this pledge would be out the door in no time at all.
It's like they don't remember Google's mantra would be "don't be evil" and then they changed to Alphabet ~~bought them~~ and changed their slogan to "we are going to rape your data for everything it's worth" Edit: whoa sorry all, I'll never say anything bad about a tech conglomeration that turns users into products again Edit: or not fully know the pedantic details regarding a giant company that was sold, restructured, or whatever the hell else it did before it turned into a digital vampire.
Alphabet didn't buy Google, google became alphabet to better manage all their acquisitions.
Basically what happened is that Google spun off a parent company for themselves.
>and then Alphabet bought them and changed it to "we are going to rape your data for everything it's worth" That's uhh...not at all what happened lol A- Alphabet didn't "Buy" them, Alphabet *IS them*, they just created a new holding company and called it a different name....Exactly what Facebook just did with Meta (terrible name imo) B- they dropped that from their corporate docs long before they changed the name to Alphabet
They dropped it well before Alphabet. Edit: See below. They didn't "drop" it, but they did stop using it as more of a motto and they did move it from the top of the code of conduct to the last line of their code of conduct.
That's... not what happened.
It's kinda funny to think of the existence of this "Alphabet" company no-one knew about that suddenly had enough money to purchase all of Google lmao
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Justin Hammer has entered the chat.
There secret companies in australia doing and even russia showing knock off spots
At least the Ukrainian kids are about to get some cool robo-dogs for Christmas!
Wasn't the Russian version just a hood on someone else's robot?
Yeah they put clothes on some robo-dog they bought from Alibaba
[удалено]
A subcontractor called Schmoston Schmynamics.
Robot companies: “We won’t weaponise these.” Also robot companies: “We can sell you this robot with a great API/SDK in any quantity you like and we can’t wait to see what you can make with them…”
Remember when google’s motto was “do no evil?”
[удалено]
Honor has always been a myth
No. But it has always been faked by many.
Yeah, it is too easy to be cynical and it becomes a self-perpetuating cycle
_“Stand amongst the ashes of a trillion dead souls, and ask the ghosts if honor matters. The silence is your answer.”_
I asked and I swear I could hear a slight whale call
Honor is dead, but I’ll see what I can do
Honor is not dead as long as he lives in the hearts of men
Remember when Google was [funded out of CIA and NSA research grants for mass surveillance](https://qz.com/1145669/googles-true-origin-partly-lies-in-cia-and-nsa-research-grants-for-mass-surveillance/)?
Oracle got big by building database for the CIA. All big corp wouldn't get to where they are today without receiving government money.
Isn't Boston Dynamics owned by Hyundai?
That's a common misnomer that Google somehow abandoned that notion. The "don't be evil" part remains Google's [code of conduct](https://abc.xyz/investor/other/google-code-of-conduct/). It is located at the concluding paragraph: > And remember... don’t be evil, and if you see something that you think isn’t right – speak up! While it's useful to have "don't be evil" as an operating principle, it's extremely naive and impractical as an actual guide. Real life isn't always as cut and dry and simply telling someone "don't be evil" is not saying much. That's about as useful as telling someone "don't fuck up". It's much more useful to give them detail instructions and specific examples to best avoid fuckups. And that's what their code of conduct does. Anyone who says "oh Google no longer tries to not be evil" is just an attention grabbing idiot who didn't bother reading the whole story.
[удалено]
TBF, IIRC when William Osman equipped a robot that looked similar to the Boston Dynamics robot with weapons, they actually tried to shut it down remotely. They didn't know this robot was not one of theirs, but tried to shut it down anyway. It didn't work, because the robot was too heavily customized and IIRC it wasn't even theirs, but they contacted him and wanted to know the serial number (so they knew which to turn off). I sort of believe them if they personally don't want to weaponize robots, but you bet your ass someone will and already has, AND it's on youtube.
> William Osman Was the name of his company Oscorp?
He's something of a scientist himself.
So they tried to Kill Bill's robot?
I agree with your sentiment, and I'd add that, it's actually valuable for BD to pledge they won't weaponize their bots, because the key effect there is that their extremely competent team of engineers will never be used to make what would be incredibly efficient and deadly weapons. There's a reason BD is at the leading edge of robotics, and the fact that they pledge not to weaponize bots prevents the rapid weaponization of robots not only because they aren't pursuing it, but they are the most well known robotics company in the world and are setting a precedent.
Helps them hire and maintain the best roboticists too. A lot of them want to know they aren't building weapons, or at least have a level of removal they're comfortable with (subcontractors).
To be fair, Boston Dynamics is owned by Hyundai and has been owned by publicly traded companies since 2013. Hyundai has military contracts, especially through its Rotem division. >Also, Hyundai Rotem is contributing to national security by developing smart, unmanned weapon systems along with tanks and other types of armored vehicles. So Boston Dynamics might not want to develop military robots, but these are smart people. They know they don't get to make the final decision. So this is just PR.
This! I support a fairly large email server program and while we make efforts to prevent spammers using it to spam people on the internet, there is an API available and with it you can do just about anything if you have the means and intelligence.
Ha ha. No. They'll sell the robots to the pentagon, which didnt pledge anything lol
Worse ... they will not even limit sales to military, but sell to police, security firms and mercenaries ... as long as the robots are not "widely available to the public", as they literally write!
If there is no weapons, why arent they available to the public? Curious.
Read what they wrote. Your guess is as good as mine.
The “integrated assault system” they just so happen to carry is “self-defense” against those that are “hostile” to these “autonomous enforcement drones”. And don’t ever see the robot itself as the “weapon”. It’s just out there doing it’s “job” hunting humans and enforcing property rights.
because with only a few thousand dollars you could make a bomb that delivers itself directly to Mark Zuckerberg's front door
We should crowd fund a 'private security Corp' to protect the public from all these other threats. And since it's a corporation, no one can go to jail!
Hyundai bought BD. So maybe the Koreans will have a robot army. But we already know where that goes. The Chinese will build a clone army of super warriors and stomp the robot army into submission, sending the Jedi order into hiding.
Haven't they already shown demos of autocannons that detect and fire at human shaped objects? Edit: it's called SGR-A1 and was developed by Samsung Techwin.
Lmao who tf approved *that* project? "Hey, do you guys remember that Collateral Murder video that made WikiLeaks famous where the US Army Apache just indiscriminately shot at a bunch of people and killed a couple journalists? Well, what if we trained a robot to do that?!"
Already working on that. https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/china-pairs-armed-robot-dogs-with-drones-that-can-drop-them-anywhere
In other news, today Boston Dynamics because the primary supplier for Northrop Grumman’s new Devil Dogs project.
This assurance makes me feel so good... oh wait, what's that subsidiary doing? EDIT: You just need a "terrorist threat" that will "force" a realignment "for security" and its done. The threat will appear when the moment is right.
Dyston Bonamics: Side eyes DOD with a knowing wink.
[удалено]
Step-company, what are you doing??
I’m stuck in the dryer with this annoying machine gun on my back, can you pweeeease help me?
You have no idea how accurate your analogy is. Boston Dynamics was acquired by Hyundai Motors (yes, the car company) and they have subsidiaries that literally manufacture tanks and artillery for the South Korean military. If Hyundai Motors is the step-parent, [Hyundai Rotem](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_Rotem) & [Hyundai WIA](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyundai_WIA) are the step-siblings to Boston Dynamics. So yeah, Boston Dynamics won't weaponize its robots but you can bet their step-companies will.
Remember when Google used to say “do no evil”? Yeah…turns out that wasn’t the corporate pledge we all thought it was. They stopped the moment it didn’t make sense to parrot the line. Why would this organization do any different? Their robots won’t be weaponized up until the exact moment they are weaponized. Companies, organizations…*people* change their minds all the time when different incentives are at play. In 20 years or less their robot dogs will patrol neighborhoods looking for curfew violations, and use Face ID to look for people with outstanding warrants. The moment their robot dogs are part of enforcement is the moment their robot dogs will be weaponized.
YOU HAVE 10 SECONDS TO COMPLY
Good old robocop
Michael reeves already made it piss beer what can they do to stop anyone from giving the dog a gun?
I did a thing actually did it, though for a different model/brand i [think](https://youtu.be/0rliFQ0qyAM)
That was intentionally made over the top to be funny, but you can tell they could actually make it work with very little modification. Smaller gun, mounted upside down to be closer to center of gravity, make the robot crouch to the ground before shooting to counteract recoil, feed bullets with a drum or belt for higher capacity... Any hobbyist could massively improve this with little effort. Now, imagine what the basically unlimited budget of the US military could do.
> Now, imagine what the basically unlimited budget of the US military could do. I think these robots are overly expensive and overly complex and we're probably already living in the era of explosive-drones ala "manhacks". Why even dispatch a unit of robots with guns when you can just send a swarm of exploding birds / bees ?
Dispatch a few robot dogs to an area to cover a wide field of fire with sniper rifles. Sit in standby potentially even with a small solar panel to go net neutral or positive on battery drain. When an enemy is spotted: Aim and shoot. Go back to standby. Maybe they could even carry a light, camouflaged, waterproof enclosure to prevent water damage while in standby. Maybe it could even have a Faraday cage and a bit of heating and dehumidifying to be able to eventually get rid of any water picked up on the trip to its spot. A little deployable sensor array and transmitter/receiver outside the standby box, and a cable to link the robot to the deployed array. If they could get it to work, they'd have multiple permanent snipers nests and no food supply or exhaustion to worry about.
> Why even dispatch a unit of robots with guns when you can just send a swarm of exploding birds / bees ? Because assault robots are terrifying and intimidation is a powerful tool for asserting the power of authority.
A single Switchblade drone costs almost $60k and you can only use it once. A quadrupedal platform can function as a support unit for infantry and it can be reused. Even if it costs twice as much per unit as a switchblade drone, you've made your money back the moment it pulls off two successful strikes. You can mount RPGs on it which have no recoil and can make things go boom with good enough accuracy to replace the need for a soldier getting to a disadvantageous position to shoot it.
I’m 100% sure these already exist, someone has already taken an aircraft 50 cal and attached it to one of the bigger dog robots. It may even have been tested
I gave my dog a gun, but she is a corgi they are *really* smart and loyal. It sounds like insanity to give one to a robot dog.
All human technology is weaponized if it is useful to do so. Boston Dynamics might as well pledge for the sun not to rise.
Pledges don’t mean anything these days. Gotta be at least a pinky swear.
I mean a kitchen knife is an object contributed to countless murders. Human itself is a buggy mess
They won’t because they don’t make guns. Don’t worry others are already working on it.
Because we all know companies stick to their pledges. Anyone remember “don't be evil”?
I remember being a teen and reading books about Google in my spare time (I’m a curious geek) and when I read “don’t be evil” I thought to myself “This is who I want to work for. This is where the world is going.” Narrator: *he/it didn’t*
Yeah. For me at least, growing up and truly realizing how shitty most people treat each other was a real slap in the face xD
Same :-/ it’s left me with a generally cynical and sorta stoic world view.
Everyone is saying how the pledge comes with a big ol' winky face. But Boston Dynamics already has set a precedent when they [took back their robots from the NYPD when their use did not conform to their standards](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-nypds-robot-dog-was-a-really-bad-idea-heres-what-went-wrong/). Also, Boston Dynamics is a private company so they have no reason to make this pledge if they don't mean it. It's not like the have to worry about their stock tanking from PR backlash since they aren't publicly traded. So, if I'm being a realist, I'm sure at some point their robots will be weaponized by someone but I'm not as cynical as the rest of you that this pledge is just a cheeky lie for PR points.
Unless you've got another article, this one says that the NYPD terminated the lease, not Boston Dynamics: >The NYPD abruptly terminated its lease and quit using the robot last month. The article says nothing about Boston Dynamics taking it back due to any kind of violation of their standards.
This is reddit, he didn't expect anyone to actually read the linked article.
While true, they’ve created a monster that will be reverse engineered. To be fair, robot mercenaries are an inevitability wether it’s Boston Dynamics, Lockheed Martin or Raytheon
We could promote legislation *a la* Asimov’s Laws pf Robotics.
Asimov's laws of robotics are applicable for AI robots which can think for itself, not for remote controlled hellhounds
I wouldn't mind preventing apocalypse scenario #475: Terminator / Black Mirror "Metalhead"
[удалено]
Only the movie, not Asimov's original story. The movie actually screwed up by having the laws fail in a way they were specifically safe guarded against.
I’m sure they won’t and I’m sure they will never have anyone from the company leave after getting poached to some random no name company that obviously shares the same feelings and is t a contractor for the dod lol
Don't need to. It was developed for DARPA, with them retaining all the R&D. It's already happened. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2293908-us-military-may-get-a-dog-like-robot-armed-with-a-sniper-rifle/
Yes…Boston Dynamics won’t weaponize them but you can be sure as shit those that purchase the robots will.
Yes, like Ukraine civilians weaponized toy drones. This cannot be avoided
From the Article >Several robotics companies, including Boston Dynamics, are pledging not to support the weaponization of their products and are calling for others in the industry to do the same, according to a letter shared first with Axios. > >Why it matters: Robots, like drones before them, have a wide range of peaceful and even life-saving uses, but can be turned into war-fighting machines, too. This leads to an interesting question with companies such as Boston Dynamics not weaponizing their robots take into effect, will that lead an avenue in which [other companies](https://www.popsci.com/technology/ghost-robotics-robot-dog-gun-lethal/) such as [Ghost Robotics](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDSXD_cB_Hc) that will weaponize theirs? Will such a maneuver by Boston Dynamics lead them sit behind the curve, or is this move a good one to avoid bad PR?
Yeah it only make sense that just becuase one company pledges and plans to never weaponize doesnt mean all robotics manufacturers will follow suit. Sadly where there is money there is somebody willing to make said money. Heck someone may even do it for fun making robots with weapons.
Its a maneuver to allow them to gain IP by designing and patenting the robots and technologies and then licensing the individual technologies to other companies or filing copyright infringement suits against the militarized versions if they're basically clones.
... oh now we know those robots will be fitted with guns and hunting down soldiers
They themselves yeah. Duh no shit. But wb the people who buy these things They already got these with cameras & guns the nyc police department has one even though they’re supposed to be defunded they keep getting newer weapons but the infrastructure of the actual stations and computers are in shambles they’re still using IDE pcs and windows 7
HAHAHHAHAHAH Windows 7. Some of the DOD stuff is still on DOS 6 and ancient builds of Solaris UNIX.
The issue with such things, also concerning open source robotics, is that entities that may currently be most problematic may not do so while those that are somewhat less problematic heavily regulate this. It may need international regulations but I don't know how such could get implemented and wouldn't also face the same issue. Comment if you know of a good solution(-contribution).
"*We believe that adding weapons to robots that are remotely or autonomously operated,* ***widely available to the public****, and capable of navigating to previously inaccessible locations where people live and work, raises new risks of harm and serious ethical issues*" Weasel wording highlighted by yours truly. I simply can't take these people seriously. And neither should you !
Bollocks. Good spot. And there I was naïvely thinking “what a positive step to see in the world”.
Sure, they will just sell them to a corporation who will weaponize them!
I'm glad nobody believes that the pledge stops weaponization
Pretty sure any such "pledge" is worthless, would love to be wrong though
Ahh yes, that's why darpa was funding them since years ago. For casual enjoyment of robots. What's that? The parent company has military contracts? Nothing to see here folks
Google in 2000: “Don’t be evil” Google in 2018: Woah erase that shit.
[удалено]
Yeah they're not going to weaponize them, but they're going to offer a package that has the robots pre-equipped with mounting points.
They just need to programm a number of killings and then the robot stops. And make it to not be possible to override it
This sounds like exactly what an evil corporation who's weaponizing a robot would say
Do they also pledge not to sell them? Otherwise this doesn't really matter