China shows off machine-gun-toting robot dog and its AI-powered puppy China has shown off a pair of robot dogs – one of them toting a machine gun and the other powered by AI. State broadcaster China Central Television (CCTV) posted news of the digital hounds earlier this week. Both strongly resemble Boston Dynamics's "Spot" robo-canine. The larger model, said to weigh in at 50kg (110¼ pounds), …
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
Both strongly resemble Boston Dynamics's "Spot" robo-canine. The larger model ... shown carrying a machine gun and advancing while being remotely operated by a Chinese soldier who causes the weapon to fire.
Because Boston Dynamics open sourced the software (github / boston-dynamics / spot-sdk) in 2020. Soon Spot's brother will sniffing down and killing any Americans found "trespassing" in Taiwan.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
True (although even a mine has a battery, but the power consumption of the sensor is negligible)
A robot dog could also be told to wait in a low-power state until it sees someone, though. A small solar panel and/or a low-power but long-duration zinc-air battery would be enough to keep the main battery topped up until it needs to move again.. All very black-mirror.
> even a mine has a battery,
Modern ones sometimes do, but a simple mine can work with just a mechanical trigger, and many do. That's one of the reasons why so many of them still pose a danger to civilians long after the wars when the mines were deployed ended.
Well, those ones should be (and surely already are) banned. I would have thought an electronic trigger is probably cheaper than a mechanical one nowadays.
But the fact you point out that they are still used doesn't give me any confidence about respect for treaties on other banned weapons types in future conflicts. (Autonomous, Chemical, Biochemical, Biological, Nuclear, etc)
When a war starts, certain countries you know will ignore treaties. China is one of them. Much like Japan in WW2 ignored the Geneva Convention. This will happen again no doubt. I don't ever expect the Taliban would ever honour the Geneva Convention.
Yes, shit on America while Russia bomb and murders civilians, China imprisons people for their religion, Uganda kills you for being gay, the UK holds you in indefinite detention, etc. fucking etc. But sure it is America's fault.
1949 Syrian coup d'état
1949–1953 Albania
1951–56 Tibet
1953 Iranian coup d'état
1954 Guatemalan coup d'état
1956–57 Syria crisis
1960 Congo coup d'état
1961 Cuba, Bay of Pigs Invasion
1961 Dominican Republic
1963 South Vietnamese coup
1964 Bolivian coup d'état
1964 Brazilian coup d'état
1966 Ghana coup d’état
1967 US manufactured coup in Greece
1971 Bolivian coup d'état
1970–73 Chile
1980 Turkish coup d'état
1979–89 Afghanistan, Operation Cyclone
1980 -1988 material support for Iraq against Iran
1981–87 Nicaragua, Contras
1983 Grenada
1996 Iraq coup attempt
2001 Afghanistan
2003 to 2011 Iraq War
2011 Libyan civil war
2011–present Syria
Panama?
IRA
Cambodia, Indonesia, PNG etc.
As is being routinely shown in Ukraine, the most difficult thing in modern warfare is logistics (actually I'd argue that's always been the case in EVERY War throughout history, but it's being aptly demonstrated at the moment in Ukraine). Resupplying the frontline, in the age of artillery and observation drones, is exceedingly difficult and dangerous. Having to restock the batteries on your Assault Dog (TM Pending), every 2 hours, is absolutely not going to be worth the hassle.
Unless of course you're going the Russian tactic of expendable meat units, or in this case expendable dog units. Charge them forward to eat up the enemies ammunition, so that you can then send in the better units to finish the job off once the enemy has exhausted their ammunition...
Er, the wholesale price of a Chinese spot-mini clone is more like $2k (i'd guess this is near the cost of a Ukranian kamikaze drone), and was recently put up for retail including flamethrower attachment for $10k.
And an autonomous rampaging-murderbot version, without the operator console and radio data-link, could be even cheaper still!
This post has been deleted by its author
Yep, otherwise you'll get it back to base with a fault and find it states "Needs to be returned to the manufacturer for repairs. Warranty void if opened". Much like a lot of the gear that was used in Afgan. Which is more reason why Right to Repair needs to be sorted.
"Excuse me, can we have a cease fire for a month. We have to send our kit back to be repaired as we're not allowed to repair it in the field. And they don't supply parts."
You're thinking too small, to do it properly you're likely to have about 4000-5000 of these things constantly back and forth, fetching carrying and shooting anything that comes near it. So the next thing is flying drones bombing these dog drones, modern warfare, just like a giant live, realtime RPG!
This post has been deleted by its author
These things are a fraction of the cost of a meat sat, and can be manufactured much more quickly. So for every meat sack you can afford to waste, you can afford to waste hundreds (or thousands) of these.
So how about I send waves of 500? (At prices quoted above, that's $1million.) To keep prices down, only a few at the back have weapons; the rest are path clearers.
If the first wave fails, I send another until all your defences are tripped and all you ammo used.
What happens when the robot dogs from opposing sides meet?
- Do they sniff each other first?
Seriously though, there will probably be an escalation of anti-canine(?) measures:
- detecting other dog's signatures:
- motor's whirring?
- lidar?
- radar?
- emi?
- rfi?
- jamming (GPS or otherwise)?
Which one will have the fastest target acquisition and then fire?
Which is most agile? Could one move fast enough to dodge a bullet (matrix style?)?
Inquiring minds want to know!
Probably, the ones in autonomous mode (kill all [unrecognised?] humans) would ignore eachother, and the rest are remotely controlled, as the ones in TFA are.
We are not in a point in the war where autonomous robots would be fighting other autonomous robots. By the time we get there, most of us will probably be toast anyway.
Its a bit ridiculous to tack something like an AK-47 on the top of a robot but you have to admit that it looks rather impressive. Its the sort of thing that would make a good movie prop but as practical weapon it has a few shortcomings. One is that the clip has only about 30 bullets in it. Once its emptied the dog's disarmed and extremely vulnerable. The other is that its hardly a stable platform for a gun -- I doubt if you could hit anything with it unless it was literally right in front of you. So I'd list this one under 'toy'.
However, if you think of this as a tech demonstrator, a pre-prototype of a purpose built device, then its a whole lot more ominous. Its just combining a lot of existing technology into a handy tank like device that can deployed 'in an urban combat situation', or as we know it in the US, 'anytime the local PD wants to execute an arrest or search warrant'. Its the modern battlefield where any wetware is instantly detected by Skynet and dealt with. Not good.
> ...would make a good movie prop but as practical weapon it has a few shortcomings.
Yeah, before WWI and WWII the US popular press was full of silly ideas. Gernsback loved that stuff. Armored motorcycles. 50 foot monowheels with canons out the sides. A toy machine gun firing sidearm ammo (Chicago typewriter). 4WD supply trucks (the Jeffery Quad, not the Jeep) served well in both France and Mexico, who woulda thought?
About your second point, I think an unarmed robot has the potential to reduce the threshold for police mistakes, and could be helpful. Police are often in the situation of being worried about getting shot, and this leads to "erratic" decisions on their part. Sending a robot with a camera to a door they are knocking on instead of standing in front of the door with their pistol drawn would reduce the errors.
Also in traffic stops - beside added safety from officers not standing in the road - a little distance between the cop and the driver could reduce misunderstandings.
Of course the worst cops would find a way to use an unarmed robot to be more abusive. Some people assume that given a random 1000 people killed by police, all of them were unjustifiably murdered innocent victims, and they would also assume that robot dogs could only used for purposes of being abusive. I don't assume that. I think policing is necessary and appreciated, and police abuse needs to be rooted out. The absence of police just leads to private police and/or gang control and increasing crime - there is a power vacuum that will be filled.
As for your first point, the obvious use for expendable cheap walking robots would probably be as a walking mine, e.g., in Ukraine where the front lines are very close. Even if they are destroyed, they flush out where the other side are firing from. A small battery is not a problem in that case. As you say, a gun is pointless.
Already the UK has issued pointy sticks to its armed forces.
These are multi purpose
1. Jab someone unpleasantly
2. Throw and shout “Fetch” to deal with these “dog of war”
3. We are developing robo catz these canines will chase them
4. Strongly worded letter as a weapon of last resort
Don’t panic and carry on
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
