Is having robotic border turrets humane ?

any border close to a population center it gets iffy. if the turret is in range of a civilian population then even if the gun is programmed not shoot in that area its too much.

lets face it, if israel deployed these a shitload of brown kids out kicking soccer balls are about to get blasted in the face probably

FPBP

wait israel already has this and has been operating them safely for years you're saying? well if thats true then good for you. but then again you are a shifty people so maybe some kids got shot in the face and you covered it up or something, or maybe the guns werent actually on you just pretended they were so you could claim a better safety record then the tech was capable of... or something like that. you gotta expect shifty business when dealing with you people no offense

I think we could do the job a lot more efficiently with drones patrolling the border. In the USA all we need to do is make the border sufficiently scary, not air tight. If suddenly attempting to cross means you have a 15% chance of being blown to smithereens, nobody is going to try.

Imagine being the jews and thinking all these guns will protect them from the wrath of the world.

Attached: world-war-z-wall.gif (500x210, 1012.52K)

>should we really be doing this ?

i mean..no.. but that has never stopped you guys from doing anything. so you do you. speaking of that, your turret lookin mad weak, son. what is that like a 1980 design? why does your concrete work look like Mexicans poured it?

Like..you already use up all our extra money, you may as well at least use our contractors also. Living in the fucking desert, fucking idiots. At least pour your concrete right and have a proper turret.

just to clarify they're not technically 'robotic' at this point just remote operated, they might give them some robotic functions in the future like a killzone (so turret wont blast everything in sight and only a certain area where legally lethal response to trespass is allowed.
right now its just a means if safely and efficiently guarding a border with less manpower
we've had them for more than a decade, first time they were used in action is late 2009 but as i said they're remote controlled by some army chicks.
i dont think current image processing tech is good enough to not get fooled by various bullshit that wouldn't fool people so a fully robotic version is still way off.

armed drones eh
well what if they get hacked and then attack a us border town?

i dont trust computers
or ai

the wall will work well enough, as you said it doesnt need to be air tight. and a wall isnt going to turn around due to faulty programming or a cyber attack and start blasting us towns and cities like your drones might.

WoW! So that's what our southern wall looks like?

based Trump

shill btfo

trust the plan

MAGA

AWOOOOOOOOO

we are past the point of "humane"

border patrol drones are used , i think pic related ended up being cancelled tho
also your border guard uses israeli hermes drones

Attached: unmannedpatrol-1-730x430.jpg (730x430, 59.91K)

wouldnt surprise me if china just started putting these up at checkpoints between cities and anyone driving around with a low credit score gets shot in the face. and a bunch of other random people also get shot in the face but fuck it, its china, so they let it roll.

that's not really a problem with modern encryption. your main problem depending on what kind of radio control you use is signal jamming and you can always program a drone to just get away whenever the command signal is jammed (as im pretty sure most airbourne millitary drones are)
im pretty sure that's how iranians brought down the american RQ-170, jammed it's command and maybe navigation so it's programmed to land at the nearest airstrip in its memory based on inertial nav as a last resort or something like that

Based Hellenic

Attached: ss+(2019-03-10+at+12.51.51).jpg (460x413, 61.98K)

does it work, is it doing its job

as soon as i start hearing
>its not really a problem with...
i get worried. that sounds like complacency. and tech is always changing, it will never be fully safe. even encryption could for all we know be busted within a few years by quantum computers developed in secret by foreign powers. maybe it can be broken now.

an unhackable computer is like an unsinkable ship: impossible

easy to hack

Neat, I'll take 2 of those

Are you gonna post this everyday?

>humane
how is it different than getting shot by a soldier? it causes the same amount of pain or it could be even more human if it could guarantee 100% headshots

nah encryption is safe its simple mathematics , you can fuck with shit like public key encryption with shor's algorithm but good old symmetric military encryption cant be cracked, the most you can do is jam the signal.

Humane? Who cares? It is essential.

They look based.

dunno some people have this meme that getting shot by a robot is worse

They are NOT AUTOMATIC ffs, they are operated remotely by wamen, so they are even more dangerous than automatic ones will ever be

The Jude is trying to justify the theft and murder of innocent Palestinians and his own wall.

Its typical war criminal behavior.

Apparently it's only inhumane if we do it.

Attached: 1582767493681.png (639x418, 286.71K)

I mean in a scenario where you have to determine who is friendly and who is foe and who's civilian or if someone's approaching you is it okay to use lethal force sure it's hard choose and programming a robot to take certain action could lead to unforeseen consequences but in this case there's no decision to be made if something's too close shoot it

nothing is safe when it comes to computers, i don't care what technobabble jargon makes you feel comfortable. there is only safe enough, and the attitude that its totally safe makes you less safe.

because a human could tell when not to shoot. a robot might shoot a child carrying an umbrella because it thinks its an enemy soldier. shit like that. and dont autistically pick apart my one vague example either that would be missing the point.

Having autoturrets is fucking based.

in some cases, with restraint and caution, ok. but i dont want to see these popping up all over the world fucking everywhere and im not comfortable with them driving or flying around.

goddamn right we should

Yes, as long its nigger, jew, poo in loo and islamtard

Attached: 04753857-5D96-4D9D-AE95-EA0CFC3D1EA8.jpg (660x660, 29.17K)

all i was saying is they cant be hacked, they can be fucked in other ways most obvious being jamming
if shit like that could be hacked you have hardware worth hundreds of billions of $ in earth orbit you can just take for yourself, there's a reason why they trust in the encryption of their command signal
>child carrying an umbrella because it thinks its an enemy soldier.
that's not really the problem because the border is still secure, the problem is if it thinks an enemy soldier is holding an umbrella when he's holding an RPG or something.
enemies might give themselves and their gear wierd painjobs and glue dumb bullshit to their weapons to break their silhouettes and the computer wont recognize them as people or their weapons as weapons where's a human operator would not be fooled.

i'd say you could have a big array or turrets and have the AI do image processing to detect any funny business going on in the frame but then leave the final decision to fire to the human, this way one person can man like 50 turrets and if you do it 100% robotically its gonna unload on tumbleweeds while some terrorist wearing a box MGS style can get around unscathed

>all i was saying is they cant be hacked
that is a worrying attitude
anything can be hacked
especially with the looming possibility of quantum ai on the horizon

>it cant reasonably be hacked in any realistic way at the moment as far as we know
fair enough
>it cant be hacked
no

jesus christ that's cool

I like the one with trax by Samsung.

well that's the
>why do thing X if we cant be 100% certain it will work?
attitude , no you cant have 100% certainty about anything. why continue living if you cant be 100% certain a meteorite or a GRB wont hit you 10 secs from now ?
the answer is that based on what little we do know the thing is worth doing because the chances are overwhelmingly in our favor.

Robots are more efficient killers without the risk of developing PTSD. I don't see the issue.

this one has a mobile version as well, and it has been battle proven with kills under it's belt and a decade of use of near constant action

Attached: opWT7OD.png (757x808, 830.38K)

>this way one person can man like 50 turrets
>leave the final decision to fire to the human
sure. combine the accuracy and speed of ai autotracking with the human capability of flexible thinking. thats probably the way to do it. just dont go assuming its 100% unhackable and foolproof thats how you could get caught with your pants down.

how many animals have you seen developing robots to kill their own to begin with dumb yingele
this is the most human thing ever

yeah i think i made myself pretty clear that im not demanding 100% certainty. i just dont like hearing people say its 100% certain as you were saying.
its mostly certain and thats fine in most situations ok. but its not fine in all situations and its not 100% certain so exercise some common sense with how you deploy these

people who act like it cant be hacked and its 100% safe so lets put them all over the fucking place everywhere. thats the wrong attitude

Yes.

RWS is the best way to shoot at someone. Thermals, 50x zoom, .50 call, GPMG, 40mm fucking have at er.

well the turrets are unhackable because it's a fucking wire, if your enemies can fuck with the wire they're already on your side of the border and in a place where your patrols should be so you got bigger problems.
the whole hacking thing was about border patrol drones with RF control.

and the point of AI is less about speed or tracking, it's about the fact that a human cant pay attention to 50 video feeds, you can create some sort of ai that alerts the human to funny business going on like cars,people walking or suspicious figures trying to fool the ai while ignoring shit like leaves moving in the wind,rain,dust and other shit that couldnt possibly be a terrorist. its using a computer to compensate for the main human drawback which is limited attention.

Definitely use them on borders, funnel people to areas where they can be processed, if you go anywhere else then you dead, nice and simple

and what if enemy spies put a backdoor in the cpu in the factory?

what if the chinese put in a secret microchip somewhere that you think only does one thing but it also has another function.

what if some chip inside the machine is programmed to accept commands via a pulsing laser light shined into the camera with a binary signal.

like fuck dude, any number of scenarios beyond your imagination.

the idea of an unhackable computer is fucking hilariously naive.

but its good enough for deployment in some cases especially with a man in the loop somewhere fine. but dont go telling me it 100% safe is all because it makes me worry you havent planned at all for the unlikely but possible scenarios

Shit, I honestly see no problem with automated turrets. If you could mount flamethrowers and grenade launchers on them as well I think it would work out better.

>and what if enemy spies put a backdoor in the cpu in the factory?
have security at your factory, dont buy components from untrustworthy parties.
>the idea of an unhackable computer
you describes one designed to be hacked, im saying one that isnt and is a military system using standard military encrypted RF communication cant be hacked.

sure you'll say 'but what if you guess the encryption key by pure chance' which has statistically less of a chance of happening than a meteor landing on your head in the next 5 secs. yea in that case it would be hacked but we're having a serious discussion which usually means dismissing far fetched 'one in graham's number' chances that might as well be magic because there's no point in considering those

Fuck children near the boarder, fire at will.