Sorry, are you asking for the readily available pictures online of the dogs with guns mounted on them?

> are you asking for the readily available pictures online of the dogs with guns mounted on them?

I am actually, yes.

Are you referring the company Ghost Robotics? That is a different company.

Or are you referring to the art installation which mounted a paintball gun on a Boston Dynamics robot which was heavily criticised by the company itself?

Which one do you think supports the robots being "murderous"?

Besides, assuming that you are a human being, I can find plenty of images of those holding guns. Are you a murderer too then?

> Besides, assuming that you are a human being, I can find plenty of images of those holding guns. Are you a murderer too then?

What an absolutely deranged sentence to read. A new low, even for this cursed pseudo-intellectual wasteland of a website.

I refuse to believe that you can't tell the difference between a human being, with autonomy and free will, and a robot with a mounted automatic gun on its back, designed and deployed with the express intention and the exclusive purpose of killing human beings. "But you can take pictures of both". Wow.

"even for this cursed pseudo-intellectual wasteland of a website" how is HN as you describe? I'm an actual intellectual and find it pretty interesting, and often engaging.

Why are you posting here if doing so means you're a contributing part of the pseudo-intellectual wasteland?

> I'm an actual intellectual

It is literally impossible to make fun of this website. It is, truly, beyond parody. I think that I'm being hyperbolic in saying shit like "everyone in this website believes they're the smartest person alive", and five minutes later I get a reply with a dimly-lit picture of a Mensa certificate. Every single time.

But I’m an actual intellectual worker - I’m an academic and employed to work purely with my mind, rather than a plumber or a mechanic who have to solve practical challenges. You’re also the one indulging in hyperbole and gross universal generalisations, hence, you’re the very pseud you're decrying.

Hi unflxw. My name is Kris. A human being. I thought I introduce myself because it does not feel like you would talk to me the way you do here if we meet in person.

You are not interacting with a website. You are interacting with real world human beings. And you are interacting in quite an abrasive and frankly hurtful way. Are you aware of that? Is that your intention?

I really don't care what you think of me. I hoped to have a nice chat about the robot dogs. But I guess you preferred to throw insults around. Sad. Anyway. Hope you will have a good day.

Hi Kris. Thank you for reaching out in this way. I am sorry about what I said, and especially so about how I said it.

My undoubtedly harsh words intended to disqualify a line of thinking that I saw as logically dishonest and ethically dubious. Regardless, I overreached and turned it into a personal attack, which was not what I intended.

I've had enough of this terrible fucking website, and the terrible fucking people in it, even if there are also plenty of wonderful, insightful people in it, worth participating in conversation with.

The latter, to answer the previously stated question, are why I have participated here, even if it means having to share a space with people who do not feel the slightest tinge of doubt, self-awareness or embarrassment whilst crowning themselves "actual intellectuals".

This website brings the worst on me, and it brings the worst in others. Everyone here acts like they're so fucking smart, saying the most inane shit to each other, pretending each comment is a philosophy treaty, and patting each other on the back for it. I'm sure we're all really nice people when you meet us in person, even if we're unbearable shitheads in here.

And in trying to counter the hypocrisy, the self-reinforcing bubble of fake intellectualism, I too became part of it and turned into one of the unbearable shitheads. What a waste of time.

Website could be full of actual trolls much subtler than you're used to.

Let's keep it civil please.

> a robot with a mounted automatic gun on its back, designed and deployed with the express intention and the exclusive purpose of killing human beings

If they were that I would agree that the "killer robot" phrase would fit then.

Can you provide evidence please? Where can I find a Boston Dynamics robot "with a mounted automatic gun on its back, designed and deployed with the express intention and the exclusive purpose of killing human beings."

As stated I searched and could not find any such thing.

You're free to do your own research if you choose. I suggest starting with the BD ethics page[0] and Spot terms of sale[1].

> We will not authorize nor partner with those who wish to use our robots as weapons or autonomous targeting systems. If our products are being used for harm, we will take appropriate measures to mitigate that misuse.

[0] https://bostondynamics.com/ethics/

[1] https://bostondynamics.com/sites/default/files/inline-files/...

[2] https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2022/10/bosto...