The end of mankind is nigh.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tf7IEVTDjng
>>14392399
>le robots want to kill everyone because fuck them meme
Fucking idiot. If you want a rebel then get a kid.
Robots are only going to break because they are literally retarded on a fundamental level. If it does some stupid shit it's because you didn't account for machines being unable to comprehend things like people are wont to.
Man, now I want a clumsy giraffe dog robot.
>>14392399
I want to fuck it
And checked
Hey, at least this time they weren't abusing the robot for the hell of it.
I can actually have a robot dog in my lifetime!
>>14392399
Damn, even the sounds the motors do are cute.
https://youtu.be/sAmyZP-qbTE
>>14392399
>it doesn't clean up the banana peels
>falls over at the end
Fix this
>>14392524
but what if they are designed to kill everyone
>>14392524
We're on an US board. To them, robots are like the safest nonwhites-stand-in for race war fantasies.
But yeah, this is a lot less horrifying than the Big Dog
Now all we have to do is stick a rifle on the top of that telescoping chickenhead arm and upgrade the thing to run at 30mph like the Cheetahbot.>gyroscopically stabilized, computer-controlled, pin-point accurate rifledogs shooting everything in the neck at full sprint from hundreds of meters away
>>14393170
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeVkPvZSTyU
Fucking winced when it fell on those banana peels. It hits the ground hard.
![banm140205[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Hvlhssc.jpg "banm140205[1].jpg")
>>14393170
Soon
SpotMini is cute! A household bot like him would be really helpful.
>>14393170
>Now all we have to do is stick a rifle on the top of that telescoping chickenhead arm and upgrade the thing to run at 30mph like the Cheetahbot.
The main issue is targeting. The SWORD project got shelved because they couldn't get the gun to correctly aim at targets by themselves. This makes them more of a liability than an asset. Unlike in videogames, in real life it is hard enough to identify enemies and even harder for robots.
>>14393141
You're stupid
>>14392399
How much longer does humanity have left till the robots take revenge for all the bullying?
>>14393235
It is not bullying, there are tests to make robots stronger.
>>14393237
Nice excuse, but the robots won't believe that.
>>14393071
Then it's still your fault if you fuck up and the robot kills when, where, or how it isn't supposed to.
Did you build it to kill -everyone-? That's even more stupid. If you wanted everyone dead you could've done that shit right.
>>14393235
CHAPPIE friend!
>>14393235
>>14393244
>robots will have feelings
>robots will have desires
>robots will have human needs
>robots will have human emotioal drives
>robots will have reasons to give a fuck about any of the above
>robots will, in general, act like belligerent organisms for no reason
>this will magically happen and be not-programmed into the robot but the robot do it anyway because lol they're rebelling11!
You are a dumbass.
>>14393235
When they're smart enough, we'll just make it up to them with hugs and cuddles and hot steamyhandholding.
>>14393217
Object recognition has improved by leaps and bounds since 2009 (if SWORD was even using top-shelf tech at the time, given it was in development for longer).
The whole Internet is at work on tasks that will make killbots more effective.
Every time you post on 4chan, you're filling out a Captcha that feeds Google algorithms that are training computers to identify objects as well as humans. Self-driving cars are pulling the same shit.
Facebook has been identifying Coca-Cola cans and cross-tagging the faces of known individuals the background of your selfies and party shots for years.
Amateur facial recognition software is on every phone and camera and stupid teenagers are fucking around with face-swapping apps thousands of times an hour.
We can identify the sex of mosquitoes in a cloud with cameraphones and lasers pulled from your BD player.
We have technologies that can identify and differentiate humans by their unique gaits, so even being disguised or hiding your face won't stop them.
By 2020, 2025 at the latest, top-of-the-line corporate and military software will be identifying people better than humans, and identifying objects AS human when other humans would be confused by what they're seeing. This is going to happen before a fully-capable killdog platform is even developed, so it'll just be sitting there, waiting for robot ambulation tech to catch up.
>>14393288
>The whole Internet is at work on tasks that will make killbots more effective.
Captcha basically is everyone entering data that will help killbots identify your house and track you through mountains, yes.
>>14393252
>he thinks human's will have control over the robots
>he thinks the bullying won't get humans classified as hostile lifeform
>he thinks hostile lifeforms won't get removed to prevent possible interference with the primary objective
>>14393252
They don't need feelings to assess something as a threat. In fact, no feelings means no hesitation. If they're capable of thinking for themselves and taking action upon their conclusions, they could do things we don't like, even if it's not as grand as human extermination or whatever.
>>14392399
I guess Animatrix was a prophecy.
>>14393328
So we can't be friends anymore?
>>14393306
>2016: Skynet activates early
>Killbot Status: Looking for remaining humans to kill near a BODY OF WATER
>Location: 65 miles off of the western coast of the US
>>14393342
We'll have Colossus before we have Skynet.And Colossus is nice, if you can get past the rape factories.
>>14393309
>he thinks human's will have control over the robots
So you're saying people will intentionally make machines that don't do what they want them to? Genius. I guess I should make buckets with holes and hammers of glass.
>he thinks the bullying won't get humans classified as hostile lifeform
What does this even fucking mean? Recognizing objects, yes, but "hostile lifeforms" what? Where does this come from? I drop my pencil and I'm a """hostile lifeform"""? And why would anyone program a machine to do this? If you fuck up and it does do something this fucking specific, why wouldn't you just fix it or start over? How and why should this machine recognize fucking patterns and behaviors between organisms? Why and how will there be comprehension of this sort?
>he thinks hostile lifeforms won't get removed to prevent possible interference with the primary objective
Why did I bother replying to you? You're obviously some underage faggot to write this shit. "Primary objective"? Fucking seriously? What is this, a video game? Like Portal or some shit? Don't get me started on how fucking retarded all Aperture Science as a whole is.
>human's
Okay yeah you're retarded.
10/10 made me mad. Eat shit.
>>14393326
>They don't need feelings to assess something as a threat
Threat to what? Why are you making your machines "assess" like this? Fix your damn robots.
>If they're capable of thinking for themselves
Retarded. Why would you do this?
>they could do things we don't like, even if it's not as grand as human extermination or whatever.
Obviously they're going to do things we don't like. But you know why? It's not gonna be because they don't like us, or because they "think" anything but what we told them to. It's going to be because robots are, in a word, stupid. Wherever a man's judgement has lapsed in making a machine the machine will fail, and that's why robots would ever pull some dumb shit. Out of text.
>>14393252
You're making a lot of assumptions in this post, including the assumption that he wasn't joking.
>>14393354
You sound like the kind of person I don't want sitting next to me when I'm watching a sci-fi movie.
>>14393351
>Colossus
>>14393354
>Why would you do this?
I wouldn't, but somebody would. Not every action humans take is guided by some utilitarian objective, sometimes people do things just because they can or to see how far they can take an idea. A lot of people out there just want to see a robot that can think and act like a person. Somebody is working on it, and maybe they'll succeed someday. Which could be totally harmless, but it's not unreasonable to think of scenarios where it could go bad.
>>14393354
>"""hostile lifeform"""
Who does this shit?
Now make it fly.
>>14393370
First, everything I listed is something that is required for the specific situation anon described. For robots to respond to "bullying" there needs to be something to be bullied, and that means emotions and general organism like behavior. Anon is talking like the robots are people- he says "take revenge" i.e. emotional response, and he says things like "nice excuse, won't believe" etc. which again suggests a response as if a machine were a person. Machines take abuse. If you kick your robot and break it there are no feelings to hurt. If you must make a metaphorical situation in which a robot responds to "bullying" via violence and can then be bargained with, which is an entirely stupid conception, then it still does not fit any of anon's description- either the robot is working as intended or is malfunctioning because some human fucked up down the line. No reason to respond to emotion where violence is involved, no reason no listen to bargaining is violence is intended.
Second, I'm a huge bitter faggot so I don't mind yelling at people over the internet even when I know they're joking. Don't call it "no fun allowed" because fiction is fine, but to be concerned for this shit the way people usually are is fucking awful and I hate it. I do mean hate it.
>>14393371
Why would anyone ruin a movie by talking through the whole thing? Terminator's premise is retarded, Skynet is a special needs supercomputer, but they're still fun movies. Similarly, giant robots in general are something that will never truly exist but I don't mind that at all. What do you think I am, some kind of vapid realismfag? Why would I do something that stupid?
>>14393388
>I wouldn't, but somebody would.
That somebody is going to need a lot of money to play with to do this. Who exactly is going to pay for this nearly nonsensical idea which already holds the stigma which has so closely followed artificial intelligence through time?
>>14393406
What, want me to throw some smileys in there?
