Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Egan_BW]

Presumably, to make it difficult to see, considering there was a post about camouflage and invisibility right above it.

Well of course, but what is this proposed robot for? It's one thing to say you can make something invisible, it's another to explain how that's actually useful. Certainly there's no reason to just make all kinds of robots hard to see, so I can infer that he had something more specific in mind. I could assume that he meant some kind of combat bot, but again, why should I guess when I can ask him?

I see. Than why should I tell, you when I can just let you infer for yourself?

[Parsely]

Presumably, to make it difficult to see, considering there was a post about camouflage and invisibility right above it.

Well of course, but what is this proposed robot for? It's one thing to say you can make something invisible, it's another to explain how that's actually useful. Certainly there's no reason to just make all kinds of robots hard to see, so I can infer that he had something more specific in mind. I could assume that he meant some kind of combat bot, but again, why should I guess when I can ask him?

I see. Than why should I tell, you when I can just let you infer for yourself?

Hm. Yes, I can see it now. Invisible orderly bots tending to injured in field hospitals. Oh wait, no I can't.

Mainly because it slows down the conversation, it's a very safe assumption given this is primarily the theoretical weapons thread, and it's probably a contributing factor to Tack finding you blunt, because it comes off as combative. :v

There's no reason not to ask, but there's also no reason for me not to ask who you mean by 'he'.

I don't intend to argue this point, just note it.

I'm not being pedantic I just don't see the point in making a transparent robot. Invisible ones sure, but I guess I'm blind to the application of transparent robots as weapons?

[Rolepgeek]

Gunin. I think it's fairly obvious than when he says 'perfectly transparent', he's trying to refer to materials that are effectively invisible. That's what the perfect bit means. So yes, you are being combative by trying to use the literal definition that you went with rather than what they were attempting to communicate.

[Parsely]

I'm not! For some reason I just thought of transparent as... Clear but reflective. Like glass. But I see now that he did say "100% transparent" meaning that the robot was invisible, so I'm sorry. It was just a misunderstanding on my part. I'm not trying to be mean.

[flabort]

I always wondered why an advanced society wouldn't just make a robot from 100% transparent materials.

What's the point in just making a robot that's transparent? What's it for? Also mind that transparent doesn't mean the same thing as "invisible".

It kind of does... it's just that the materials we think of as transparent are only 80% to 90% transparent (like top-notch glass), with translucent refering to 30-60% transparency. 100% transparency would indeed be synonymous with invisible.

Edit: Oh, you just came to that conclusion.

Edit 2: as for uses, you weren't far off when you said orderlies in field hospitals. Field medics, who can go out onto the battlefield and treat wounded without being seen and targeted by the enemy, would be pretty useful. You know medics often got prioritized as targets during WWII? And I'm assuming other wars too. And the enemy could tell they're medics due to the arm-bands. So invisible medics to treat and/or rescue wounded in the field would not be bad.

[Parsely]

as for uses, you weren't far off when you said orderlies in field hospitals. Field medics, who can go out onto the battlefield and treat wounded without being seen and targeted by the enemy, would be pretty useful. You know medics often got prioritized as targets during WWII? And I'm assuming other wars too. And the enemy could tell they're medics due to the arm-bands. So invisible medics to treat and/or rescue wounded in the field would not be bad.

As long as the invisible robot is cheaper than a man trained to be a medic then I don't see why not. But if that's true, then why aren't the soldiers themselves being made invisible? Is this invisibility technology in that sweet spot where it saves more money to just make medic bots than it does to try and improve the survivability of the riflemen themselves? Maybe it's so cheap that every entity on the battlefield is invisible and warfare is just fought between lots of invisible robots/men/vehicles trying to detect each other via means other than eyesight?

[chaotic skies]

Honestly, the more advanced weapons get, the less wounded you can expect; you can't exactly fix Bill if he's been blown to pieces by a high-powered rifle, now can you?

[Amperzand]

On the other hand, you might very well be able to fix Unit-5284c after it takes a missile to the track mounting. With more widespread automation/drone warfare, combat mechanics would likely become extremely valuable, all the better if they are, themselves, cheap and automated.

[Parsely]

I think that the military will be dying to get it's hands on drone MBTs. You don't have to train 3-4 crew members and you can save SO much space inside a vehicle if you don't have to put people inside it.

[TheDarkStar]

@Amperzand: What if your fixers malfunction? Then what would you do?

fix the fixers obviously

and if those malfunction?

it's fixers all the way down

[Amperzand]

I was thinking make the repair drones cheap and simple, all they need in the way of fancy hardware is a good CPU. Basically design everything else to be printed out of steel powder/uberclear material, give the thing a grasper, a waldo-limb covered in tools, and a self-destruct charge, grab a $100 CPU off the rack, you're ready to go.

The MBT needs all kinds of expensive machined parts and targeting computers, the engidrone needs a few good wrenches, a welding torch, and a smart brain/teleop unit.

[GiglameshDespair]

Then you make them capable of building large 3d printers, and the 3d printers can make more bots.
And then Supreme Commander.

[Amperzand]

Of course, after a few iterations of that, unless they've got some damn good thinky-bits, you start to have copy error become a  major issue.

[Grimlocke]

Indeed, it might turn out your bots have neither the will nor the skill to make more of themselves, and they just end up wasting all the raw material on a junkyard full of parts that don't fit together.

I think you can make even very smart robots quite safe to use if you just program with the right motivators, and make sure said motivators are read-only. Or you know, not leaving them unsupervised with whole industry chains and the raw materials to feed them.

[chaotic skies]

Or just not make them self-replicating at all. That's always the safest option.