![Bravo Company BCM](/images/2016/banners/sticky/BCM_StickyBarAd_225x40.gif)
![Login](/images/2016/spacer.gif)
[#1]
All I'm saying is....
Load that into that robot that keeps escaping, and give it a longer extension cord, and then set it loose in downtown Chicago and then lets' see what's what... ![]() It may be smart enough to realize the only way to win is not to play at all |
|
[#3]
Quoted:
When it flys an actual aircraft, call me, Sounds like Lee couldnt beat a game console. A computer beat a chess master. But didnt manipulate an actusl chess board. Were atmospheric and weather conditions a variable? How about 10 hajis with MANPADS? Some day. But not this day. View Quote There is no reason it couldn't control any modern aircraft now. And it would be able to execute maneuvers At the edge of the envelope of the equipment, rather than worrying about the fragile squishy pink thing that might normally pilot a fighter. |
|
[#4]
Quoted:
When people in power come to realize what the threat is, AI experts and computer scientists in the field will start dropping like flies and the companies that fund the research with get worse that the Tea Party people got from the IRS. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I could tell you what the brakes are, hint it ends badly for anyone in the AI field. That only delays it. From the moment we started using tools as a species there was no stopping it. When people in power come to realize what the threat is, AI experts and computer scientists in the field will start dropping like flies and the companies that fund the research with get worse that the Tea Party people got from the IRS. Even if that were true, which I doubt. That would only stop it in the US, other countries would not see things the same and press on. |
|
[#5]
I wondered how they were going to secure com the link for unmanned fighters. They are going to skip the ground control and make the autonomous. Pretty scary actually.
|
|
[#6]
Quoted:
Quoted:
link Artificial intelligence (AI) developed by a University of Cincinnati doctoral graduate was recently assessed by subject-matter expert and retired United States Air Force Colonel Gene Lee — who holds extensive aerial combat experience as an instructor and Air Battle Manager with considerable fighter aircraft expertise — in a high-fidelity air combat simulator. The artificial intelligence, dubbed ALPHA, was the victor in that simulated scenario, and according to Lee, is “the most aggressive, responsive, dynamic and credible AI I’ve seen to date.” ... It was only after early iterations of ALPHA bested other computer program opponents that Lee then took to manual controls against a more mature version of ALPHA last October. Not only was Lee not able to score a kill against ALPHA after repeated attempts, he was shot out of the air every time during protracted engagements in the simulator. Since that first human vs. ALPHA encounter in the simulator, this AI has repeatedly bested other experts as well, and is even able to win out against these human experts when its [the ALPHA-controlled] aircraft are deliberately handicapped in terms of speed, turning, missile capability and sensors. ... Lee, who has been flying in simulators against AI opponents since the early 1980s, said of that first encounter against ALPHA, “I was surprised at how aware and reactive it was. It seemed to be aware of my intentions and reacting instantly to my changes in flight and my missile deployment. It knew how to defeat the shot I was taking. It moved instantly between defensive and offensive actions as needed.” He added that with most AIs, “an experienced pilot can beat up on it (the AI) if you know what you’re doing. Sure, you might have gotten shot down once in a while by an AI program when you, as a pilot, were trying something new, but, until now, an AI opponent simply could not keep up with anything like the real pressure and pace of combat-like scenarios.” ... The AI is so fast that it could consider and coordinate the best tactical plan and precise responses, within a dynamic environment, over 250 times faster than ALPHA’s human opponents could blink. UC’s Cohen added, “ALPHA would be an extremely easy AI to cooperate with and have as a teammate. ALPHA could continuously determine the optimal ways to perform tasks commanded by its manned wingman, as well as provide tactical and situational advice to the rest of its flight.” However, ALPHA and its algorithms require no more than the computing power available in a low-budget PC in order to run in real time and quickly react and respond to uncertainty and random events or scenarios. ... The ALPHA programming is generational. It can be improved from one generation to the next, from one version to the next. In fact, the current version of ALPHA is only that – the current version. Subsequent versions are expected to perform significantly better. Again, from UC’s Cohen, “In a lot of ways, it’s no different than when air combat began in W.W. I. At first, there were a whole bunch of pilots. Those who survived to the end of the war were the aces. Only in this case, we’re talking about code.” Congratulations to Colonel Dunsail. ![]() |
|
[#7]
Quoted:
The fact that it can run on a basic computer tells me that it's unlikely simulating sensor systems, fields of view, line of sight, radar systems,jamming .etc View Quote How the hell does it tell you that? ![]() Being one of the guys who has developed similar systems I can assure you those parameters (and more) are included in simulations. Otherwise you don't get much meaningful data. |
|
[#8]
Quoted:
Didn't they do tht already? Late 90's dsat phones of the smae name? Huge commercial failure as I recall. I think they wound up shutting don the sats after they went BK. May have sold a few off, even de-orbited some I think. I would never reuse that name especially for a space based corp. ![]() View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Iridium Next 100% global coverage broadband. The first satellites are to be launched next month by SpaceX. Didn't they do tht already? Late 90's dsat phones of the smae name? Huge commercial failure as I recall. I think they wound up shutting don the sats after they went BK. May have sold a few off, even de-orbited some I think. I would never reuse that name especially for a space based corp. ![]() Last time I checked (about 4 years ago) Iridium was still very much in operation, as we were using it as part of a project I was on. |
|
[#9]
Quoted: As of 300 generations, Quiede Zinawe is leading the pack with a score of 315.48, but still falling short of his ancestor, Jinomu Bagiqe, who scored 528.34 in Generation 138. Quiede, get it together, man! View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: [For those who haven't worked with GA's, here's an entertaining example] Genetic Algorithm Example Thank you for this. As of 300 generations, Quiede Zinawe is leading the pack with a score of 315.48, but still falling short of his ancestor, Jinomu Bagiqe, who scored 528.34 in Generation 138. Quiede, get it together, man! I got a score over 900 in about 104 generations. I cut it off soon after. |
|
[#10]
Quoted:
Last time I checked (about 4 years ago) Iridium was still very much in operation, as we were using it as part of a project I was on. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Iridium Next 100% global coverage broadband. The first satellites are to be launched next month by SpaceX. Didn't they do tht already? Late 90's dsat phones of the smae name? Huge commercial failure as I recall. I think they wound up shutting don the sats after they went BK. May have sold a few off, even de-orbited some I think. I would never reuse that name especially for a space based corp. ![]() Last time I checked (about 4 years ago) Iridium was still very much in operation, as we were using it as part of a project I was on. Motorola failed with Iridium. They sold the infrastructure to another company. It may have been sold again since. |
|
[#11]
Quoted:
I got a score over 900 in about 104 generations. I cut it off soon after. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
[For those who haven't worked with GA's, here's an entertaining example] Genetic Algorithm Example Thank you for this. As of 300 generations, Quiede Zinawe is leading the pack with a score of 315.48, but still falling short of his ancestor, Jinomu Bagiqe, who scored 528.34 in Generation 138. Quiede, get it together, man! In the 300s, I got 2 scores over 1000. This was not repeated again by the time I shut it off at about 530. |
|
[#12]
Lee should have done a Kobiashi-Maru on the system the night before........
|
|
[#13]
An entire squadron of A.I. fighter planes working in perfect unison with each other in a dogfight would be an interesting thing to see.......
Hopefully we develop it first. |
|
[#14]
So AI beats some old air force guy at a video game? That's like saying AI beat a USMC grunt at halo.
|
|
[#15]
Quoted:
You accidently described part of the F35 capabilities. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
When it flys an actual aircraft, call me, Sounds like Lee couldnt beat a game console. A computer beat a chess master. But didnt manipulate an actusl chess board. Were atmospheric and weather conditions a variable? How about 10 hajis with MANPADS? Some day. But not this day. They're not there yet, at least as far as I know as a civilian that's not in that industry, but I suspect it won't be that many years when a manned aircraft is either dead from a laser or outflown by semi autonomous drones. I wouldn't be surprised if you had a small number of manned planes flying w/ lots of drones w/ the option to hand them off to remote controllers farther away if necessary. You accidently described part of the F35 capabilities. It's inevitable. Make cheap drones you can afford to lose/use up. Problem w/ them is going to be (at least initially) that there isn't a human in the loop, and remote access is going to be relatively slow and vulnerable to jamming or killing satellites. The solution is to send a human or humans along to control the swarm. Long term you will probably be able to do without them on a lot of missions. |
|
[#16]
Quoted:
It's really not that hard to believe that computers are smarter than humans . Not much of an accomplishment . View Quote its not that hard to believe a machine could beat a human when a machine does not have the same physical restraints as a real pilot. When is the last time a computer G-locked or errored from fatigue? |
|
[#17]
|
|
[#18]
Quoted:
Think they'll beat project loon by Google? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Iridium Next 100% global coverage broadband. The first satellites are to be launched next month by SpaceX. Think they'll beat project loon by Google? Iridium and project loon have completely different products and markets. I'm also not sure what the connection is between Iridium and an AI software for a fighter ![]() |
|
[#19]
Quoted: its not that hard to believe a machine could beat a human when a machine does not have the same physical restraints as a real pilot. When is the last time a computer G-locked or errored from fatigue? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: It's really not that hard to believe that computers are smarter than humans . Not much of an accomplishment . its not that hard to believe a machine could beat a human when a machine does not have the same physical restraints as a real pilot. When is the last time a computer G-locked or errored from fatigue? ![]() |
|
[#20]
Quoted:
Didn't they do tht already? Late 90's dsat phones of the smae name? Huge commercial failure as I recall. I think they wound up shutting don the sats after they went BK. May have sold a few off, even de-orbited some I think. I would never reuse that name especially for a space based corp. ![]() View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Iridium Next 100% global coverage broadband. The first satellites are to be launched next month by SpaceX. Didn't they do tht already? Late 90's dsat phones of the smae name? Huge commercial failure as I recall. I think they wound up shutting don the sats after they went BK. May have sold a few off, even de-orbited some I think. I would never reuse that name especially for a space based corp. ![]() They did - It went bankrupt and was bought out by what is now Iridium Communications. The constellation is still in orbit and providing service. Did you watch American Sniper? Remember the little Iridium logo on the phone he dropped? |
|
[#21]
Quoted:
I got a score over 900 in about 104 generations. I cut it off soon after. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
[For those who haven't worked with GA's, here's an entertaining example] Genetic Algorithm Example Thank you for this. As of 300 generations, Quiede Zinawe is leading the pack with a score of 315.48, but still falling short of his ancestor, Jinomu Bagiqe, who scored 528.34 in Generation 138. Quiede, get it together, man! Looks like I've been breeding a bunch of underachieving kinematic klutzes. Still felt bad closing the window. Felt like murder. ![]() |
|
[#22]
Quoted:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2015/01/28/bill-gates-on-dangers-of-artificial-intelligence-dont-understand-why-some-people-are-not-concerned/ Shortly after, Bill Gates was asked how much of an existential threat superintelligent machines pose to humans. The question has been at the forefront of several recent discussions among prominent futurists. Last month, theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking said artificial intelligence "could spell the end of the human race." [Why the world’s most intelligent people shouldn’t be so afraid of artificial intelligence] Speaking at the MIT Aeronautics and Astronautics department’s Centennial Symposium in October, Tesla boss Elon Musk referred to artificial intelligence as "summoning the demon." I think we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. If I were to guess like what our biggest existential threat is, it’s probably that. So we need to be very careful with the artificial intelligence. Increasingly scientists think there should be some regulatory oversight maybe at the national and international level, just to make sure that we don’t do something very foolish. With artificial intelligence we are summoning the demon. In all those stories where there’s the guy with the pentagram and the holy water, it’s like yeah he’s sure he can control the demon. Didn't work out. British inventor Clive Sinclair has said he thinks artificial intelligence will doom mankind. "Once you start to make machines that are rivaling and surpassing humans with intelligence, it's going to be very difficult for us to survive," he told the BBC. "It's just an inevitability." After gushing about the immediate future of technology in his Reddit AMA, Gates aligned himself with the AI alarm-sounders. "I am in the camp that is concerned about super intelligence," Gates wrote. "First the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super intelligent. That should be positive if we manage it well. A few decades after that though the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern. I agree with Elon Musk and some others on this and don't understand why some people are not concerned." View Quote Freedom is scary yo. Why do you want more government regulation? |
|
[#23]
Quoted:
I know it's not popular. But we have two levels of warfare now. Both, have very unique requirements. The US is the only superpower. If it wants to effectively dissuade any nation state challengers to this position it needs to invest in: 1. most advanced and flexible nuclear weapons system 2. missile defense systems 4. submarine fleet 5. advanced surveillance systems. Fighting criminals (e.g. ISIS, Islamic terrorist) requires police operations. 1. flexible, light, and fast interdiction forces. 2. advanced surveillance View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
As long as we spend more than 1/3 of our budget on aircraft, we are losing the long term arms race. I know it's not popular. But we have two levels of warfare now. Both, have very unique requirements. The US is the only superpower. If it wants to effectively dissuade any nation state challengers to this position it needs to invest in: 1. most advanced and flexible nuclear weapons system 2. missile defense systems 4. submarine fleet 5. advanced surveillance systems. Fighting criminals (e.g. ISIS, Islamic terrorist) requires police operations. 1. flexible, light, and fast interdiction forces. 2. advanced surveillance Why are you arguing in favor of destabilization? |
|
[#24]
Quoted:
It cannot be far the day the Chinese or Ruskies put up something that has the capability to outfly our meatsicle pilots. At that point we have to be able to counter or at minimum instantly fry their command and control structure. Frankly it (unmanned vehicles) should be easier at todays level of tech available to us and several others. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Robots are not affected by high Gs and can react thousand times faster than human. We dead ![]() Yeah, any day now the 2000 year old chinese civilization will sprint past our 200 year old nation. |
|
[#25]
Quoted:
They are not smarter. They just "think" faster. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
It's really not that hard to believe that computers are smarter than humans . Not much of an accomplishment . They are not smarter. They just "think" faster. Not yet. They will be though. At that point, our future will be determined by their preferences, not our own. |
|
[#26]
Quoted:
They're not smarter, they have no intelligence per se, they are just very good, and very fast at evaluating pre programmed scenarios. Their advantage lies in raw speed of decision-making View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
It's really not that hard to believe that computers are smarter than humans . Not much of an accomplishment . They're not smarter, they have no intelligence per se, they are just very good, and very fast at evaluating pre programmed scenarios. Their advantage lies in raw speed of decision-making So they're really good at ooDa? |
|
[#27]
Quoted:
Terminators would be a good thing. Turning over complete control to a homicidal AI, well that's a bit of a grey area. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
When people keep assuring me that Terminator will never become a reality: ![]() Terminators would be a good thing. Turning over complete control to a homicidal AI, well that's a bit of a grey area. I'm just looking forward to when they start delivering pizzas. |
|
[#28]
Quoted:
All of the instruments, cockpit pressurization, ECS far larger than avionics alone would require, ejection seat and rails, lost volume for all of those things. I've always said we should take our boneyarded F-16s and yank all that bullshit out, replace the canopy with a radome and put an all aspect antenna array in it, and couple all the control systems. Not like the QF-16s they are building now, but an airplane meant to fight. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok, but for a supersonic aircraft like a fighter, what percentage of the air vehicle weight is devoted to supporting a human crew and the interface for the crew? All of the instruments, cockpit pressurization, ECS far larger than avionics alone would require, ejection seat and rails, lost volume for all of those things. I've always said we should take our boneyarded F-16s and yank all that bullshit out, replace the canopy with a radome and put an all aspect antenna array in it, and couple all the control systems. Not like the QF-16s they are building now, but an airplane meant to fight. And who are we going to fight with this aircraft? |
|
[#29]
Quoted:
Is there one easy universal question it can ask to determine if you're a one world commie liberal, and then attack? Something subtle so that their feels will more than likely overcome their discretion, like:"Do you belive that fur is murder?" Cause I could really get behind that. As far as power sources, nuclear power plants could probably be made much smaller and lighter, when you don't have to put human grade shielding into the design. Skynet can afford to scrap irradiated robots that have done their job, say leveling Rhode Island, if it's necessary. View Quote Yeah who needs human grade shielding at airbases. |
|
[#30]
|
|
[#31]
Quoted:
And who are we going to fight with this aircraft? View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok, but for a supersonic aircraft like a fighter, what percentage of the air vehicle weight is devoted to supporting a human crew and the interface for the crew? All of the instruments, cockpit pressurization, ECS far larger than avionics alone would require, ejection seat and rails, lost volume for all of those things. I've always said we should take our boneyarded F-16s and yank all that bullshit out, replace the canopy with a radome and put an all aspect antenna array in it, and couple all the control systems. Not like the QF-16s they are building now, but an airplane meant to fight. And who are we going to fight with this aircraft? Any 2nd-4th gen threat that isn't worth wasting raptor sorties against. |
|
[#32]
Quoted:
Any 2nd-4th gen threat that isn't worth wasting raptor sorties against. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok, but for a supersonic aircraft like a fighter, what percentage of the air vehicle weight is devoted to supporting a human crew and the interface for the crew? All of the instruments, cockpit pressurization, ECS far larger than avionics alone would require, ejection seat and rails, lost volume for all of those things. I've always said we should take our boneyarded F-16s and yank all that bullshit out, replace the canopy with a radome and put an all aspect antenna array in it, and couple all the control systems. Not like the QF-16s they are building now, but an airplane meant to fight. And who are we going to fight with this aircraft? Any 2nd-4th gen threat that isn't worth wasting raptor sorties against. So we'll fly raptors in training and fly these against the Bears so they can prove our electronics. Smart. |
|
[#33]
Quoted:
When it flys an actual aircraft, call me, Sounds like Lee couldnt beat a game console. A computer beat a chess master. But didnt manipulate an actusl chess board. Were atmospheric and weather conditions a variable? How about 10 hajis with MANPADS? Some day. But not this day. View Quote fly-by-wire It's not a huge leap to remove the wetware, and replace it with software and hardware. The entire transportation industry is going to go through massive change over the coming years. A lot fewer humans will be needed. |
|
[#34]
Quoted:
I'm not sure an F or an F/A is the best platform, or at least not as we know them. When you start to stack requirements like >5000lb carriage, >500nm combat radius, >1.0M, >3g, there is diminishing return for being pilotless. Push on one side of the design space balloon and the other side bubbles out - only through careful design from all aspect can you uniformly compress the design balloon. As a sensor test bed, maybe, but in all probability, that stuff would be tested on very un-fighterish civilian passenger aircraft before incorporation into a purpose built vehicle. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
How long before they retrofit a fighter and have it go toe to toe with a human pilot? I'm not sure an F or an F/A is the best platform, or at least not as we know them. When you start to stack requirements like >5000lb carriage, >500nm combat radius, >1.0M, >3g, there is diminishing return for being pilotless. Push on one side of the design space balloon and the other side bubbles out - only through careful design from all aspect can you uniformly compress the design balloon. As a sensor test bed, maybe, but in all probability, that stuff would be tested on very un-fighterish civilian passenger aircraft before incorporation into a purpose built vehicle. Those requirements, which are written by and for pilots, are fucking retarded. |
|
[#35]
Quoted:
fly-by-wire It's not a huge leap to remove the wetware, and replace it with software and hardware. The entire transportation industry is going to go through massive change over the coming years. A lot fewer humans will be needed. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
When it flys an actual aircraft, call me, Sounds like Lee couldnt beat a game console. A computer beat a chess master. But didnt manipulate an actusl chess board. Were atmospheric and weather conditions a variable? How about 10 hajis with MANPADS? Some day. But not this day. fly-by-wire It's not a huge leap to remove the wetware, and replace it with software and hardware. The entire transportation industry is going to go through massive change over the coming years. A lot fewer humans will be needed. |
|
[#36]
Quoted:
Those requirements, which are written by and for pilots, are fucking retarded. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How long before they retrofit a fighter and have it go toe to toe with a human pilot? I'm not sure an F or an F/A is the best platform, or at least not as we know them. When you start to stack requirements like >5000lb carriage, >500nm combat radius, >1.0M, >3g, there is diminishing return for being pilotless. Push on one side of the design space balloon and the other side bubbles out - only through careful design from all aspect can you uniformly compress the design balloon. As a sensor test bed, maybe, but in all probability, that stuff would be tested on very un-fighterish civilian passenger aircraft before incorporation into a purpose built vehicle. Those requirements, which are written by and for pilots, are fucking retarded. So what should the specs be? |
|
[#37]
Quoted:
Quoted:
An entire squadron of A.I. fighter planes working in perfect unison with each other in a dogfight would be an interesting thing to see....... Hopefully we develop it first. A dogfight against whom? Some pilots soon to be dead, as a guess. Remember, ALPHA runs on a Raspberry Pi system that currently costs $35, and was flying a simulated aircraft that was designed to carry humans. How much better would it perform if it had a higher power computer and was commanding a purpose built drone that could pull more g force that any person while carrying a bigger weapons payload? Soon, very soon.... |
|
[#38]
Quoted:
Some pilots soon to be dead, as a guess. Remember, ALPHA runs on a Raspberry Pi system that currently costs $35, and was flying a simulated aircraft that was designed to carry humans. How much better would it perform if it had a higher power computer and was commanding a purpose built drone that could pull more g force that any person while carrying a bigger weapons payload? Soon, very soon.... View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
An entire squadron of A.I. fighter planes working in perfect unison with each other in a dogfight would be an interesting thing to see....... Hopefully we develop it first. A dogfight against whom? Some pilots soon to be dead, as a guess. Remember, ALPHA runs on a Raspberry Pi system that currently costs $35, and was flying a simulated aircraft that was designed to carry humans. How much better would it perform if it had a higher power computer and was commanding a purpose built drone that could pull more g force that any person while carrying a bigger weapons payload? Soon, very soon.... ICBMs keep use safe. The Air Force wastes money. Pilots shouldn't exist. |
|
[#39]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How long before they retrofit a fighter and have it go toe to toe with a human pilot? I'm not sure an F or an F/A is the best platform, or at least not as we know them. When you start to stack requirements like >5000lb carriage, >500nm combat radius, >1.0M, >3g, there is diminishing return for being pilotless. Push on one side of the design space balloon and the other side bubbles out - only through careful design from all aspect can you uniformly compress the design balloon. As a sensor test bed, maybe, but in all probability, that stuff would be tested on very un-fighterish civilian passenger aircraft before incorporation into a purpose built vehicle. Those requirements, which are written by and for pilots, are fucking retarded. So what should the specs be? Wrong question. The real question is What should drive requirements? The answer is a comprehensive strategy informed by strategic intelligence. We don't have that. We have a clueless President, supported by a DoD of yes men, who claim they can do everything with less resources. There are no priorities. So funding goes to the best lobby. It turns out the zipper suits are good fear mongers, and the aero industry has a strong lobby. Add in congressional corruption, and you've got massive amounts of wasteful spending on shit we don't need. |
|
[#40]
Quoted:
ICBMs keep use safe. The Air Force wastes money. Pilots shouldn't exist. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
An entire squadron of A.I. fighter planes working in perfect unison with each other in a dogfight would be an interesting thing to see....... Hopefully we develop it first. A dogfight against whom? Some pilots soon to be dead, as a guess. Remember, ALPHA runs on a Raspberry Pi system that currently costs $35, and was flying a simulated aircraft that was designed to carry humans. How much better would it perform if it had a higher power computer and was commanding a purpose built drone that could pull more g force that any person while carrying a bigger weapons payload? Soon, very soon.... ICBMs keep use safe. The Air Force wastes money. Pilots shouldn't exist. Yup...............................Yup...........................................Nope |
|
[#41]
Quoted:
Wrong question. The real question is What should drive requirements? The answer is a comprehensive strategy informed by strategic intelligence. We don't have that. We have a clueless President, supported by a DoD of yes men, who claim they can do everything with less resources. There are no priorities. So funding goes to the best lobby. It turns out the zipper suits are good fear mongers, and the aero industry has a strong lobby. Add in congressional corruption, and you've got massive amounts of wasteful spending on shit we don't need. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
How long before they retrofit a fighter and have it go toe to toe with a human pilot? I'm not sure an F or an F/A is the best platform, or at least not as we know them. When you start to stack requirements like >5000lb carriage, >500nm combat radius, >1.0M, >3g, there is diminishing return for being pilotless. Push on one side of the design space balloon and the other side bubbles out - only through careful design from all aspect can you uniformly compress the design balloon. As a sensor test bed, maybe, but in all probability, that stuff would be tested on very un-fighterish civilian passenger aircraft before incorporation into a purpose built vehicle. Those requirements, which are written by and for pilots, are fucking retarded. So what should the specs be? Wrong question. The real question is What should drive requirements? The answer is a comprehensive strategy informed by strategic intelligence. We don't have that. We have a clueless President, supported by a DoD of yes men, who claim they can do everything with less resources. There are no priorities. So funding goes to the best lobby. It turns out the zipper suits are good fear mongers, and the aero industry has a strong lobby. Add in congressional corruption, and you've got massive amounts of wasteful spending on shit we don't need. And all those people answer to the public. Want to fix the problem? Educate the voting population. Your fight is with them, but you know you can't win that, so people bitch online. |
|
[#42]
Quoted:
Yup...............................Yup...........................................Nope View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
An entire squadron of A.I. fighter planes working in perfect unison with each other in a dogfight would be an interesting thing to see....... Hopefully we develop it first. A dogfight against whom? Some pilots soon to be dead, as a guess. Remember, ALPHA runs on a Raspberry Pi system that currently costs $35, and was flying a simulated aircraft that was designed to carry humans. How much better would it perform if it had a higher power computer and was commanding a purpose built drone that could pull more g force that any person while carrying a bigger weapons payload? Soon, very soon.... ICBMs keep use safe. The Air Force wastes money. Pilots shouldn't exist. Yup...............................Yup...........................................Nope |
|
[#43]
Quoted:
We have a clueless President, supported by a DoD of yes men, who claim they can do everything with less resources. There are no priorities. So funding goes to the best lobby. It turns out the zipper suits are good fear mongers, and the aero industry has a strong lobby. Add in congressional corruption, and you've got massive amounts of wasteful spending on shit we don't need. View Quote I get half of that but I know you're at the very least 99% right. |
|
[#44]
Quoted: How the hell does it tell you that? ![]() Being one of the guys who has developed similar systems I can assure you those parameters (and more) are included in simulations. Otherwise you don't get much meaningful data. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: The fact that it can run on a basic computer tells me that it's unlikely simulating sensor systems, fields of view, line of sight, radar systems,jamming .etc How the hell does it tell you that? ![]() Being one of the guys who has developed similar systems I can assure you those parameters (and more) are included in simulations. Otherwise you don't get much meaningful data. I'd guess that it uses something similar to invisible cones projecting from the various simulated sensors and if an object in the sim passes within those cones telemetry such as orientation, speed, direction, and user inputs is fed into the A.I. for decision making. Save |
|
[#45]
It won't be stopped. Those developing it believe they can maintain control of it. Those in power believe they can control those developing it and use it for their own ends. It will, of course, end them, but it will end the rest of us first, whether we resist or not.
People have always been people. There's smart and there's common sense. Unfortunately they usually don't go hand in hand. |
|
[#46]
AI is a very hot topic today https://t.co/t60wj5hYFI USA TODAY
Microsoft's Nadella says 'A.I. must guard against bias' Edward C. Baig, USA TODAY "Satya Nadella is a believer in the vast promise of artificial intelligence. But the Microsoft CEO says humans and machines need to work together to solve the world’s great societal challenges, including issues of diversity and inequality." Nadella’s remarks come as the booming but still relatively nascent AI field confronts instances of gender and race bias in computer programs, from chat bots to search engines to photo apps. Ugly examples (Microsoft's own chatbot engaging in racial slurs, for instance) have served as a reminder that these algorithms reflect the views, biases and experiences of their creators. And unless the industry shakes up its programming ranks, those may largely consist of highly paid white men. The New York Times chimed in with “A.I’s Grasp of Diversity May Begin With Who Builds It,” which followed a Sunday Timesopinion piece, “Artificial Intelligence’s White Guy Problem.” It was written by a Microsoft principal researcher Kate Crawford, who is also co-chairwoman of a White House symposium on society and A.I. For years, critics have been flagging racial bias in search results. Most recently, an 18-year old Virginia high school senior compared a Google image search for “three black teenagers” to a search for “three white teenagers.” The results were troubling: the black teen query turned up police mugshots; the white teen search yielded groups of smiling teens. "We have to ask ourselves: If Google is not responsible for its algorithm, who is?" said UCLA information studies and African American studies professor Safiya Umoja Noble. In today’s Slate post, Nadella pushed on the idea that the humans behind the machine are ultimately responsible for what happens next. “All of the technology we build must be inclusive and respectful to everyone…. A.I. must maximize efficiencies without destroying the dignity of people: It should preserve cultural commitments, empowering diversity. We need broader, deeper, and more diverse engagement of populations in the design of these systems… A.I. must have algorithmic accountability so that humans can undo unintended harm. We must design these technologies for the expected and the unexpected. A.I. must guard against bias, ensuring proper |
|
[#47]
|
|
[#49]
The human can reprogram the machine. The machine is well, just a machine.
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.