News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by philwelch on Friday July 10, 2009 @04:53PM (#698364)
Article describes a DARPA robot that powers itself by gathering and fueling itself from biomass. This is apparently an approach to energy-autonomous recon robots (harvest grasses and plants where it goes) that has amusingly terrifying connotations when you consider the mental image of a chainsaw-wielding robot capturing and devouring, say, people.

It seems that DARPA, which once built things that seemed like the fevered imaginations of a 14 year old boy, is now building things that seem like the fevered imaginations of a 7 year old boy.

Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by forsaken on Friday July 10, 2009 @05:56PM (#698480)
In my opinion this is a good thing. I'd much rather have the things that my younger imagination thought up, because they are almost certainly cooler.

Making the things that people want who have no idea of the things they aren't supposed to want.

Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by BrentRitterbeck on Friday July 10, 2009 @05:28PM (#698426)
<sarcasm> Surely any robot built by the U.S. government will be bound by Asimov's three laws of robotics. </sarcasm>
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by arakyd on Friday July 10, 2009 @05:55PM (#698475)
From the RTI website, a presentation they supposedly gave to the Army War College Strategic Studies Institute in April:

A code of moral behavior for intelligent robots will be developed. Isaac Asimov’s Three Laws are insufficient (especially for military).

Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by philwelch on Friday July 10, 2009 @06:02PM (#698496)
David Langford's Three Laws:

1. A robot will not harm authorized Government personnel but will terminate intruders with extreme prejudice.

2. A robot will obey the orders of authorized personnel except where such orders conflict with the Third Law.

3. A robot will guard its own existence with lethal antipersonnel weaponry, because a robot is bloody expensive.

(Langford is an SF writer. You might know him from his "basilisk" stories--if not, go read them sometime.)

Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by BrentRitterbeck on Friday July 10, 2009 @05:59PM (#698486)
I understand that. My sarcasm was apparently a failed attempt at being somewhat humorous after a long week.
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by arakyd on Friday July 10, 2009 @06:20PM (#698523)
Both of our posts would be funnier if the project was anything other than vaporware.
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by tptacek on Friday July 10, 2009 @04:53PM (#698363)
This massively improves my opinion of what DARPA is spending my money on.
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by digitallogic on Friday July 10, 2009 @07:47PM (#698618)
Getting worked up over the potential of a DARPA research project is like getting yourself worked up over a popular girl when you were in high school. There's almost no chance those ideas will come to fruition, and on the slim chance something does, it will be in the far off future and nothing like you initially thought.
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by raffi on Friday July 10, 2009 @05:19PM (#698410)
And this my friends is why government research is awesome. DARPA and crackpot scientists--coming to a future near you.
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by ivankirigin on Friday July 10, 2009 @11:17PM (#698775)
This is linkbait. Biomass can mean plant matter. I've worked on DARPA funded robots.
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by chadgeidel on Friday July 10, 2009 @05:07PM (#698388)
From The Register... I'm not holding my breath.
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by arakyd on Friday July 10, 2009 @05:31PM (#698432)
They cite their sources - just follow the trail a few more steps.

http://www.robotictechnologyinc.com/index.php/EATR:

At the sixth (System of Systems) level, which has not yet been implemented, the 4D/RCS serves as an overarching intelligent control and decision system for (all or part of) a manifold of distributed unmanned and manned platforms, unattended sensors and weapons, and control centers.

Ambitious!

Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by moe on Friday July 10, 2009 @06:38PM (#698545)
SkyNet, here we come.
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by lispm on Friday July 10, 2009 @06:26PM (#698529)
is there any non-military research left in the US?
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by digitallogic on Friday July 10, 2009 @07:48PM (#698619)
There's plenty, but in pales in both breadth and depth (number of sources and amount of money offered) compared to DOD funding.
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by 4chan4ever on Saturday July 11, 2009 @01:56AM (#698878)
I thought DARPA ceased to exist when they moved the island.
Re:Darpa stops trying not to be terrifying. by onreact-com on Friday July 10, 2009 @06:03PM (#698501)
Seems to be inspired by the latest Terminator movie. Why do we need more killer machines, are the people in charge afraid that some day humans will refuse to fight for the "just causes" they are presented?