Ukraine (19 Viewers)

Nice try and using some mental gymnastics to avoid saying he or we made a mistake. I see posters here on SR making similar arguments or philosophical or logical fallacies all the time and no one counters by quoting Hume or G.E. Moore.

The problem, as I see it, is that "optics" from 2014 show Putin defying world opinion and international law by seizing territory from a weak, divided country and later on, some people use "whataboutism" to cover up not admitting maybe we made a mistake because it was one mistake among many. At least bclemms was honest enough to say we can admit we made a mistake and try to do better, in retrospect.
I'll just just say that while 2014 is part of the puzzle as to how we got here, that whole episode is water under the bridge at this point. It's 2024 now, 10 years later. Let's focus the discussion more on the here and now and debate the other stuff on the politics board.
 
Last edited:
I'll just just while 2014 is part of the puzzle as to how we got here, that whole episode is water under the bridge at this point. It's 2024 now, 10 years later. Let's focus the discussion more on the here and now and debate the other stuff on the politics board.
Thank you for being honest, Dave. That's all I wanted to hear and yes, it is one part of a long train of events that lead us to getting here.

Let's get back to discussing the most important issue and thats covering the war in Ukraine.
 
You also haven't touched upon nanites. They would be too small under the field conditions for most people to see, or hear coming. They wouldn't need more explosive than they could carry if they fly into a human ear canal, open mouth, or up a nostril before they explode.

Think fire ants swarming on the ground in legs with an tiny explosive stinger. They could also take a small amount of steel away from a machine by stinging it. Bit by bit wear the machine down with tiny explosions until it's all gone. A 155 melts away before their very eyes

 
Indeed. I've heard that one can fry eggs poured out on a block of ice at a 5 mile distance, if one guides a tight enough beam from that system upon it.
You can also fry an aircraft’s electronics with that same beam, back in the 90s. I don’t know how much more advanced it is now.
 
You also haven't touched upon nanites. They would be too small under the field conditions for most people to see, or hear coming. They wouldn't need more explosive than they could carry if they fly into a human ear canal, open mouth, or up a nostril before they explode.

Think fire ants swarming on the ground in legs with a tiny explosive stinger. They could also take a small amount of steel away from a machine by stinging it. Bit by bit wear the machine down with tiny explosions until it's all gone. A 155 melts away before their very eyes
Google “smart dust”.
 
Nice try and using some mental gymnastics to avoid saying he or we made a mistake. I see posters here on SR making similar arguments or philosophical or logical fallacies all the time and no one counters by quoting Hume or G.E. Moore.

The problem, as I see it, is that "optics" from 2014 show Putin defying world opinion and international law by seizing territory from a weak, divided country and later on, some people use "whataboutism" to cover up not admitting maybe we made a mistake because it was one mistake among many. At least bclemms was honest enough to say we can admit we made a mistake and try to do better, in retrospect.
I guess I better reevaluate if you're able to read my mind. I didn't know I was thinking about all of that just to avoid saying "We made a mistake."

See I can say that. Now what were we talking about???

Oh yeah, Can you teleport things from one place to another as well telepath. That would be so cool.

------

Good thing that you're introducing G.E. Moore as an either or proposition. I would think that quoting both Hume and G.E. Moore mixed up together at the same time would lead to a hard vacumb. they would tend to cancel each other.

Mere mortal matter would likely evaporate in such an environment.

I suppose don't know what I would do with G.E. Moore, I don't tend to agree with him that much. I become irritated with him, with Kant as well. I simply kant Kant.


Humor is how I hang in there.
 
Google “smart dust”.
In my house I can detect three bluetooth devices I cannot find, and as thus have no idea what they are. I can't figure out how they have remained powered for such a long time. I would have thought a battery would have run out of juice.

Or maybe I'm charging something up and using it, not realizing that it's bluetooth capable. Or it has "smart dust" in it's innards.

Maybe one of them is hiding in a bag of flour in my kitchen, and it eats that flour to power itself.
 
you could drive two 16 ft flatbeds that would hold 50-100 drones each, they launch remotely, and with a click, engage in GPS/AI until target.

thats where this is headed.

thats 100-200 explosive-laden drones, impervious to jamming because they operate autonomously with AI. The applications are endless in a theater of war.

We have MALDs - Mini Air Launched Decoy- that sole task is to expose enemy AD sites. ( and hope they also engage ), target and damage or destroy- then minutes later the real thing flies thru with a depleted AD array

Imagine what a swarm could do. at a fraction of the cost of just one MALD.

So many various applications.

And we havent even touched on surface/sub surface drones in naval applications.
If UAF or Russia had something like this, I think we would know about it by now.

They both seem to think drones are useful mainly as one offs being contorlled by individual soldiers, and as part of command center. Except for the really long range ones, but I'm not sure you count those as drones, they are more like long range cruise missiles, which are nothing new. Exactly how they work is classified up the wazoo. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some terminal "smart" guidance to the target in the case that GPS signal was being jammed. Tech that has existed since the 90s, albeit heavily evolved.

Well maybe not all that classified. Here's the paper on DSMAC, used in the Tomahawk. Publication date 1980. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980SPIE..238...36C/abstract

And what do you know, here' s a reference how DSMAC is used in long -range kamikaze drones by the UAF


For the mobile targets (vehicles, tanks, ships, soldiers, etc.). pretty sure its still manual control by camera feed.

The fundamental shift occurs, when those mobile "targets of oppornity" are being autonomously struck by these drones, without human interaction at all. I don't see any evidence this is taking place to any signfiicant degree. Perhaps a fallback , and I'd be surprised if that wasn't the case, as there is littel downside in a warzone with mostly known battle lines. As evidenced by the repeated mention of comms being jammed disabling UAF drone ops. (Jammed comms should not stop autonomous drones)
 
Last edited:
I guess I better reevaluate if you're able to read my mind. I didn't know I was thinking about all of that just to avoid saying "We made a mistake."

See I can say that. Now what were we talking about???

Oh yeah, Can you teleport things from one place to another as well telepath. That would be so cool.

------

Good thing that you're introducing G.E. Moore as an either or proposition. I would think that quoting both Hume and G.E. Moore mixed up together at the same time would lead to a hard vacumb. they would tend to cancel each other.

Mere mortal matter would likely evaporate in such an environment.

I suppose don't know what I would do with G.E. Moore, I don't tend to agree with him that much. I become irritated with him, with Kant as well. I simply kant Kant.


Humor is how I hang in there.
Humor is
I guess I better reevaluate if you're able to read my mind. I didn't know I was thinking about all of that just to avoid saying "We made a mistake."

See I can say that. Now what were we talking about???

Oh yeah, Can you teleport things from one place to another as well telepath. That would be so cool.

------

Good thing that you're introducing G.E. Moore as an either or proposition. I would think that quoting both Hume and G.E. Moore mixed up together at the same time would lead to a hard vacumb. they would tend to cancel each other.

Mere mortal matter would likely evaporate in such an environment.

I suppose don't know what I would do with G.E. Moore, I don't tend to agree with him that much. I become irritated with him, with Kant as well. I simply kant Kant.


Humor is how I hang in there.
Humor is indeed how we hang in there and coping with an often illogical, contradictory world, Sam. Kant’s “Categorical Imperative” while extremely valid, and immensely moral and ethical premium, has been proven to have some real-world application issues or flaws. There are occasions where lying or deceiving someone is a moral necessity to ensure a larger, moral ethical purpose.


I’m more a pseudo-Nietzschen existentialist in the sense that the worst types of liars, driven power-mad idealogues who argue and then later condone mass atrocities are driven by internal convictions that can be worse, more irrational forms of truth then lies. Who cares if 15-20 million people die due to starvation, famines, gulags, secret police state terror, we’re making a better world for our grandchildren and that justifies a brutal, one-party Stalinist dictatorship and during the 1930’s and 40’s, quite a few Western intellectuals, “useful idiots” looking desperately for alternatives to decadent bourgeois liberalism or the rise of fascism, mortgaged their integrity, intellectual credentials, credibility by buying into that babbling nonsense wholesale.


At least you heard me out and went easy on me and injected some humor into the equation to defuse the whole matter.


Let’s try and focus on the most important issue and that’s covering this war in Ukraine and hoping it can successfully fend off this full-scale invasion that their fighting for their very national sovereignty.
 
Last edited:
I've seen a drone show like that as well. I have insight as to how that would be accomplished by a fairly simple program. They navigate in a choreographed way off of a transmitted locator beacon. There were several of those beacons set up on that field in that video.

They are the tripod things with the white dome on the top. They appear to be the standard beacons surveyors use. Much of the programing they use for land surveying would be ready to use out of the box for a drone show modification to that standard programing. A land surveyor joked with me that with the new gadget stuff they have, they have become like robots, a machine tells them where to walk, and where to make their marks on the ground. The machine logs their progress and takes down the notes they will need back at the office when they write the reports, and even then the machine writes much of that report for them.

A simple program where each drone has an internal program guiding it with no interaction with a human operator after pressing the program run button. The drone only interacts with that locator beacon after the command to start.

None of that seems likely to find a use on a battlefield. That capability has none of the features a battlefield would need. They drones ignore all but that locator beacon. There is nothing there to be adapted for them to adapt to the realities of a battlefield. Nothing there which is AI.

My daughter is a cognitive scientist. She got that interest in cognitive science from me. We discuss AI a lot, she's on the project to develop one so to speak. All of the cognitive scientists in one way or another seem to be on that project.

Our consensus is that the media is leading people into thinking AI's are upon us now. That AI development still has long way to go before they actually exist.

The AI toys on the Internet are that, toy's. They are very advanced programs, but not self aware "intelligencef" yet.

The hardware needed for AI is also not yet in place. She'll live long enough to see it happen, I won't live that long.
So, Skynet or at least fully-automated battle computers running wars from logistics, attack strategems, counter-strategies isn’t a complete reality that these nanites, drones and bots haven’t developed the ability to be “self-aware” but that distinction will occur in the next couple of decades. It seems the Terminator movies were far more prophetic 40 years later then even futurists and high tech experts could’ve foreseen or imagined. Isaac Asimov forays and warnings seem pretty prescient at times, particularly “I, Robot”.



How do we develop safe-guards to prevent these programs from going completely rogue under the worst-case scenarios?
 
Last edited:
If UAF or Russia had something like this, I think we would know about it by now.

They both seem to think drones are useful mainly as one offs being contorlled by individual soldiers, and as part of command center. Except for the really long range ones, but I'm not sure you count those as drones, they are more like long range cruise missiles, which are nothing new. Exactly how they work is classified up the wazoo. I wouldn't be surprised if there was some terminal "smart" guidance to the target in the case that GPS signal was being jammed. Tech that has existed since the 90s, albeit heavily evolved.

Well maybe not all that classified. Here's the paper on DSMAC, used in the Tomahawk. Publication date 1980. https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1980SPIE..238...36C/abstract

And what do you know, here' s a reference how DSMAC is used in long -range kamikaze drones by the UAF


For the mobile targets (vehicles, tanks, ships, soldiers, etc.). pretty sure its still manual control by camera feed.

The fundamental shift occurs, when those mobile "targets of oppornity" are being autonomously struck by these drones, without human interaction at all. I don't see any evidence this is taking place to any signfiicant degree. Perhaps a fallback , and I'd be surprised if that wasn't the case, as there is littel downside in a warzone with mostly known battle lines. As evidenced by the repeated mention of comms being jammed disabling UAF drone ops. (Jammed comms should not stop autonomous drones)

oh we arent there yet. And my posts on this subject werent stating as much ( regarding swarms/autonomy ) i hope.

but we are headed in that direction for sure. Ukraine is the ultimate proving ground for development of marrying technology to munitions.

I think i mentioned way back ( well last 4-5 days or so ) that there is no greater engine for "innovation" than necessity. Ukraine is FULL of smart folks and are fueled 100% out of necessity.

Do we get to full autonomous drones in this conflict? probably not. But the "what ifs" are being played out in real-time, real-battle which is a much greater test than a bunch a dudes sitting around a white board shouting out what if scenarios.

just as recent at April 10, the Marine Corps selected 3 companies to compete for OTH loitering drone contract. One is exiting Switchblade mfg - AeroVironment.

One other? Teledyne. ( which is WAY too close to "Cyberdyne" for me lol )
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom