Many moons ago, before we invaded Iraq, the Pentagon was doing invasion simulations. The navy guy opposing the American fleet in one of those simulations sunk the important parts of the fleet. All he had to do was shoot a bunch of cruise missiles. What prob happened to the Movka was Ukraine sent about a hundred drones at it. The missile came in just afterward, after their defensive missiles were depleted. The future of war, assuming there is a future (or a future for war) is unmanned devices. A fighter drone now can run circles around a manned fighter, have a much smaller radar profile, and is cheap enough that it doesn't have to be multi-role. Did you see where the Army is developing robot soldiers. Assume they will be backed up by a variety of drones. You wouldn't want to be anywhere near there. This will fundamentally change things, just as it did for that Russian ship. And I have no idea what that means in the big picture. Only thing I do know is that this is weird beyond words.
I remember hearing the same thing after the Falklands, that big ship Navies and aircraft carriers were obsolete. But since then, there hasn't really been anything to demonstrate that since we have not had any peer/near peer conflicts that had a naval component. But I think that's probably the basis for the multiple war game defeats the US Navy had running the China-Taiwan scenario.
Switch blade drones are very interesting. The whole apparatus weighs in around 5 lb I believe, the blades of the drone fold up and it is fired from a mortor like tube by a soldier on the field. Also known as Kamikaze drones, It can perform a variety of functions but probably the most important one is their ability to fly into a Target and detonate. Sufficient to take out armored vehicles without causing massive collateral damage in that vicinity.
Oooooo, nice bit of logic. About 100 years ago, when I was in high school and was in regular debate and public speaking events, I argued the day would come when wars are fought by robots and other technologies, and not people. If our robots defeat their robots, the war is over. There is no way the people could combat the technology so they surrender. It seems that day may be close.
Terminator. It means skynet and terminators. The only thing really lacking at this point is the centralized artificial intelligence that sees humans as a threat. And there are several of those being built by various organizations.
We are nowhere near building the level of AI that might constitute a threat. Our relationship with computers is symbiotic, and will stay that way for some time..
China, Tesla, Google, Microsoft, Nvidia... just off the top of my head Russia was building one too, specifically to coordinate eletronic battlefields. Its Armata tank in particular was designed with the expectation that battlefield tactics would eventually be centered around an AI that used predictive algorythms to guide battlefield strategies in real time. Though I havn't heard much lately on their progress. Clearly it isn't finished yet.
You've never seen Terminator? Skynet is an artificial intelligence, designed to perfect our military defenses, instead it decides to wipe out humanity.
We don't really know that because we don't know what determines when free will becomes possible, if such a thing actually exists. Interestingly, the most likely network to be self aware is the internet itself - this because many suspect size and complexity bring about self awareness. And the internet is the largest and most complex network on the planet. But even if self aware, that doesn't mean it has free will. The funny thing is, just the other day my computer was asking me if it could really just be a brain in a jar, with an evil genius making it think the external world exists.... Of course I started laughing hysterically....
