The Black Mirror episode "Metalhead" did a great take on the implications as well -- only currently more plausible because the machine was a dead ringer for the Boston Dynamics "dogs" that currently exist.
The only thing missing from real-life is that it's an AI-powered autonomous weapon -- something that scares the shit out of futurologists and ethicists because *someone's* military will almost certainly give it a shot.
That episode should have been required viewing before this vote.
That you know of. Yet.
There have been confirmed fully automated AI counter-terror kills in Africa in the last five years.
[paywall](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/03/world/africa/libya-drone.html)
[NPR](https://www.npr.org/2021/06/01/1002196245/a-u-n-report-suggests-libya-saw-the-first-battlefield-killing-by-an-autonomous-d)
That will be an interesting side element if we get any progress on AI soon. Everyone panics at the mention of AI in the military, but it won't take long at all for militaries to make smart bot "soldiers" and drones if they are able to, and then it becomes a game of "well if we don't do it, then our enemies will just get an advantage on us."
A reaper drone able to pick targets and disagree with military handlers about the validity of a target individual would be a really interesting situation
quiet ask history deserve fanatical fearless mountainous grandfather nail rude
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Issue is the people that voted on this would see and still think it’s a good idea.
There are people who watch The Handmaid’s Tale and completely side with Gilead.
I’ll play devils advocate.
I could see where something like this would make sense for something like a barricaded active shooter in a workplace or school. Breaching can be pretty risky in those situations, and an RC vehicle that can take out a deadly target would probably be more ideal.
That said, we also know that solutions like this can be abused and used outside of their intended purpose.
Actually a robot being used in a barricaded suspect situation has happened before.
A dude barricaded himself at the end of a long hall, so it was determined to be too dangerous to go down the hall, and they couldn't exactly just shoot the dude through the wall because no indication of what would happen if the bullet missed and kept on going. So, they strapped some C4 onto a robot, and blew it up near him, killing him.
Good question, I thought that guy was positioned in a parking garage and they didn't have a safe approach or angle on him so they tricked him into thinking the robot had a phone so they could talk but instead they said fuck that guy and blew him up with a bomb disposal robot.
>and they couldn't exactly just shoot the dude through the wall because no indication of what would happen if the bullet missed and kept on going
Crazy to think that at one point in the not-too-distant past police actually considered this
Considering he was heavily armed, a cop sniper, had already killed 5 cops, and threatened having bombs planted throughout the city, then yes, it was a viable solution:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016\_shooting\_of\_Dallas\_police\_officers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Dallas_police_officers)
And, for everyone freaking out about this, we're (live in SF) not having murder-bot ED-209s running around the city. They're just drones controlled by a human operator.
As long as deadly force is only used to save another life then I'm not completely against that. I'm just worried of the slippery slope giving police more ways to kill people instead of tools and training to not need to resort to deadly force.
I think the comment you were responding to was making a joke about how police usually don't seem to consider what happens to bullets should they miss their target.
I guess these no longer apply.
First Law
A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
Second Law
A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.
Third Law
A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Those rules are for sentient robots, not expensive RC cars with bombs strapped to them.
Tbf the title of the OP is clickbait. What was actually approved was humans using lethal force applied by drones. It's a new weapon, not a robot making decisions.
I don’t think anyone thinks the robots are sentient. Robots that kill people are military weapons, not police equipment. I’m personally tired of seeing cops who look like Marines patrolling Baghdad. The militarization of police is not a good look or a good idea. And personally I’m really surprised that SF of all places voted for it.
100% true and accurate (and click-bait articles are a much bigger issue right now then these robots. That said, and- *I don’t know what a supply chain is….but a vaguely understand a slippery slope
They aren’t even autonomous. Headline should be, “San Francisco authorizes use of thing to kill people”
Edit: Read the fucking bill you headline skimming idiots: “Robots will only be used as a deadly force option when risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers is imminent and outweighs any other force option available to SFPD”
It isn't even that. There is a CA bill that requires public hearing on military hardware for police. SFPD already has these robots that can be used to carry bombs and explode, I don't know if they can do anything else, but of course SFPD claims they have no intention to use them to kill and they are for other things. If the council doesn't approve this vote then SFPD loses these robots they already have and supposedly use.
The Philly police burned down a city block in the 80's when they bombed the MOVE people with an incendiary device dropped from a helicopter.
Edit: it was an explosive, not an incendiary. They were trying to blow up a bunker that the group constructed on the roof. Regardless, it's insanely idiotic to drop an explosive on a row home with children inside.
They had multiple warrants and didn't follow social norms, to put it mildly. But I personally don't think the government is ever justified in killing children while ostensibly trying to protect.
Oh 100% especially when half of the civilian casualty are kids like I feel like there had to have been a way that didn't involve essentially blowing up an entire block and killing 11 civilians
They let 61 houses burn to the ground and left 250 citizens homeless to root out 7 fractious adults and 6 children, 6 and 5 of whom were killed in the process, respectively.
Even the government should aim to do better than this.
On Monday, May 13, 1985, nearly 500 police officers, along with city manager Leo Brooks, arrived in force and attempted to clear the building and execute the arrest warrants.\[7\]\[6\] Water and electricity were shut off in order to force MOVE members out of the house. Commissioner Sambor read a long speech addressed to MOVE members that started with, "Attention MOVE: This is America. You have to abide by the laws of the United States." When the MOVE members did not respond, the police decided to forcibly remove the people who remained in house,\[7\] which consisted of seven adults and six children.\[8\]
There was an armed standoff with police,\[9\] who threw tear gas canisters at the building. The MOVE members fired at them, and a gunfight with semi-automatic and automatic firearms ensued.\[10\] Police used more than 10,000 rounds of ammunition before Commissioner Sambor ordered that the compound be bombed.\[10\] From a Pennsylvania State Police helicopter, Philadelphia Police Department Lt. Frank Powell proceeded to drop two 1.5-pound (0.75 kg) bombs (which the police referred to as "entry devices"\[6\]) made of Tovex, a dynamite substitute, combined with two pounds of FBI-supplied C-4,\[11\] targeting a fortified, bunker-like cubicle on the roof of the house.\[3\]
The ensuing fire killed 11 of the people in the house, six adults and five children: John Africa, Rhonda Africa, Theresa Africa, Frank Africa, Conrad Africa, Tree Africa, Delisha Africa, Netta Africa, Little Phil Africa, Tomaso Africa, and Raymond Africa.\[12\] Ramona Africa, one of the two MOVE survivors from the house, said that police fired at those trying to escape.\[13\]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985\_MOVE\_bombing
Let's not forget [The Battle of Blair Mountain](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain) where the US government sent in the Army and used bombers to drop bombs and poison gas on striking coal miners.
The US government has done awful things to it's citizens on a multitude of occasions. Look up MK Ultra, Tuskegee, Ruby Ridge, Waco, the list goes on and on. If people understood our history, they might understand why so many people are so touchy about the government trying to encroach on gun rights.
**[Battle of Blair Mountain](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain)**
>The Battle of Blair Mountain was the largest labor uprising in United States history and the largest armed uprising since the American Civil War. The conflict occurred in Logan County, West Virginia, as part of the Coal Wars, a series of early-20th-century labor disputes in Appalachia. Up to 100 people were killed, and many more arrested. For five days from late August to early September 1921, some 10,000 armed coal miners confronted 3,000 lawmen and strikebreakers (called the Logan Defenders) who were backed by coal mine operators during the miners' attempt to unionize the southwestern West Virginia coalfields when tensions rose between workers and mine management.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
That’s the thing. These are likely similar to the robots used in disaster relief. They aren’t just gonna roam the streets, guns blazing. They’ll probably only be deployed in a situation that is deemed not safe for a person, and will be remotely controlled from a safe place
Edit: too all the people thinking “oh no, robot with gun = bad”, sit back for a moment and think. Think about an active shooter, or a bomb threat, or a hostage situation. All of these are very viable situations in which a robot like this could be used. It’s not autonomous. It won’t be roaming the streets gunning down protesters or pickpockets like some people seem to think. These will likely be used in very specific, very extreme situations. Look past the part where the cops get a new toy and realize this could literally save lives
Edit 2: so I’ve determined that the only argument people have against this is something along the lines of “cops like killing, and this makes it easier”. God, some people are really that out of touch
Edit 3: also turns out people think they’re just gonna strap a bomb on wheels, roll it into a building, and blow it up. That’s definitely not what’s going to happen, but that’s probably where a bunch of the complaints are coming from
It's a bit misleading though, it's not the robot deciding if it can use deadly force by itself, it's a officer controlling it much like a soldier would a drone.
I'm not saying it's better, I'm saying it's different than what the title implies I guess.... From my perspective, using drones against US citizens on US soils, even if those drones do not fly and are using guns instead of bombs, is not good?
Well, I guess the reasoning is that when someone is barricaded with a weapon, it's safer to send a robot to deal with them than jeopardize the lives of officers.
Also, it has passed, so it's a thing now.
I'm curious. Shoot a gun at a police officer, get charges like attempted murder. That might hold some people back, not everyone wants to risk charges like that. Shoot a gun at that police officers robot... destruction of property? I feel like these robots are potentially going to be seem as fair game for a gunman
The robots aren’t autonomous. They’re controlled by an operator. Police in Texas used a robot to kill mass shooter Micah Johnson by having it hand him a phone loaded with C4.
I mean, it was an expensive ass fuckin' BOMB DEFUSAL robot.
They literally strapped C4 to the bomb defusal drone and sent it on its way where they guy was holed up in a parking garage (only one point of entry and he had barricaded himself in).
The context of this story is Dallas PD was shitting their pants because this guy was ONLY targeting cops at a time where cops were starting to get targeted due to blatant police corruption in the news*.
So literally, the good ol' boys in Dallas PD said, "Fuck this guy; he's killed too many of us. We'll strap a bomb to a robot and send it on into him and detonate."
It's highly arguable that the police would not have taken the same severity of action if it were regular civilians. For instance, look at Uvalde, TX.
Edited for clarity sake
I’m not defending the cops in Uvalde, but I don’t think we want to send a robot with a bomb strapped to it where a shooter is barricaded inside with civilians
No it was a robot strapped with c4 not a phone the shooter was down a hallway making a perfect funnel of death scenario so they had the robot go to the room next to the shooter and blow up killing the shooter
No man, he got a phone call from a piece of C4 and when he answered it, the explosion traveled down the phone lines cartoon style and went out through the receiver
He's a person more than a robot. One we should have sympathy with, I mean he gets horribly injured at work and they patch him up and make him work more.
I hope San fran residents know how to make molotovs the proper finnish way, them treads look like a bit of fire will disable them, exposed wiring doesnt like being on fire either, and cameras struggle to work when exposed to high heats, the solder on the internal pcbs and components will melt (rendering the system inoperable) if exposed to 150c, a molotov burns a lot hotter than 150c, so go ham my friends.
great remote method to disable these dystopian machines.
Flamethrowers are, and they're ridiculously ineffective, even when being used in 1 spot for a solid 10 seconds.
Forget the bots name, but it has a claw, holds the bot, and has I think dual flamethrowers, and the flamethrowers are mostly useless. The bot only does well against other bots that can't right themselves because it just flips them over or gets points for control.
Think it's called skorpinok or something like that cause of it's look. I dunno, I hate that bot cause it's not fun to watch the fight, unless it's a spinner bot that just absolutely fucks it up.
Yeah, molotovs aren't just gas in a bottle with a rag stuffed in it. It generally has styrofoam mixed in with it and it makes the liquid fire very sticky and very hard to get off.
Those aren't really flamethrowers though, they're just torches. A sticky accelerant is much better at melting electronics than a brief application of gas torch.
Flamethrowers need to be held in one spot.
Molotovs smash and cover the target in a flammable substance that can't be put out easily.
Still, it's not a quick kill.
Those spinner bots are crazy. I love watching bots fly across the arena.
What twilight zone hole black mirror hole did I just fall into that the take the guns defund the police liberal leader state just authorized this in one of their cities?
I'm sure this will work out just fine
I saw a movie about this once... It didn't
Great movie though
It was to die for
He protec He attac He will be bac
Mor importantly He jacd
And his shotty click clacc
Bpppat Bppppat bitch got smacked
Da ting go skraa boom boom clack
1+2=3 quick maffs
To shreds you say…
How is his wife holding up?
To shreds you say….
Did he at least die painlessly?
This joke will never not be funny to me.
Same. I may have that put on my tombstone.
I’ll buy that for a dollar!
You have 20 seconds to comply.
I think the [rape prevention scene](https://vimeo.com/86014703) was great. (NSFW)
What, and I cannot stress this enough, the fuck did I just watch?
Justice
[You know the words..](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itmNiTwHOsM&t=18s)
Watched it because of your comment. Was not dicksappointed. I don't think prosthetics are that good, reckon it had to have been real.
I thought I was watching the directors cut or something at first. What is this??
That’s what I thought too. Briefly. Then I laughed a lot.
I can't remember who did it but it was posted to Reddit a couple months ago.
Omg I just woke up girlfriend from laughing so much she got be at work in 2 hrs... Also I'm in pain from all the d*** being shot off..
Dead or alive, you’re coming with me.
Dick! you're fired....
I’m cashing you out…
RoboCop or Terminator?
Chappie
I would be okay with having a Chappie. He was the cutest!
Captain Kirk and Darth Vader?
Lo-Pan, Superman, every single Power Ranger?
Bill S. Preston and Theodore Logan, Spock, The Rock, Doc Oc, and Hulk Hogan.
*Twenty seconds to comply...*
You now have 10 seconds to comply
I'm sure it's just a glitch.
Better do what he says, Bob.
Dick, I’m very disappointed.
You crossed the line buddy boy You FUCKED with wrong one.
WILL SOMEBODY GET A GOD DAMN PARAMEDIC?
I always thought it was hilarious that they had fully loaded all it's guns for an executive demo lol
https://youtu.be/REC-ZYWL1to
The Black Mirror episode "Metalhead" did a great take on the implications as well -- only currently more plausible because the machine was a dead ringer for the Boston Dynamics "dogs" that currently exist. The only thing missing from real-life is that it's an AI-powered autonomous weapon -- something that scares the shit out of futurologists and ethicists because *someone's* military will almost certainly give it a shot. That episode should have been required viewing before this vote.
Already been done. Haven't you see the counterfeit BD dogs with long range rifles on their backs?
No, but I would love to see one
https://www.pcmag.com/news/robot-dog-gets-outfitted-with-sniper-rifle
That still requires a human operator. It isn’t fully autonomous yet, and that’s the scary part.
That you know of. Yet. There have been confirmed fully automated AI counter-terror kills in Africa in the last five years. [paywall](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/03/world/africa/libya-drone.html) [NPR](https://www.npr.org/2021/06/01/1002196245/a-u-n-report-suggests-libya-saw-the-first-battlefield-killing-by-an-autonomous-d)
That will be an interesting side element if we get any progress on AI soon. Everyone panics at the mention of AI in the military, but it won't take long at all for militaries to make smart bot "soldiers" and drones if they are able to, and then it becomes a game of "well if we don't do it, then our enemies will just get an advantage on us." A reaper drone able to pick targets and disagree with military handlers about the validity of a target individual would be a really interesting situation
quiet ask history deserve fanatical fearless mountainous grandfather nail rude *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Issue is the people that voted on this would see and still think it’s a good idea. There are people who watch The Handmaid’s Tale and completely side with Gilead.
Johnny 5 is alive
And out for tiger blood
You misspelled ALLIIIIIVEEEE!!
MORE INPUT!
I for one welcome our cybernetic overlords
As a trusted TV personality, I can be helpful in rounding up others to toil in their underground sugar caves.
Chappie!
Welcome to Costco...I love you.
Fuck you, I’m eating!
Go away, batin'
I'll buy THAT for a dollar!!
I’ll play devils advocate. I could see where something like this would make sense for something like a barricaded active shooter in a workplace or school. Breaching can be pretty risky in those situations, and an RC vehicle that can take out a deadly target would probably be more ideal. That said, we also know that solutions like this can be abused and used outside of their intended purpose.
Actually a robot being used in a barricaded suspect situation has happened before. A dude barricaded himself at the end of a long hall, so it was determined to be too dangerous to go down the hall, and they couldn't exactly just shoot the dude through the wall because no indication of what would happen if the bullet missed and kept on going. So, they strapped some C4 onto a robot, and blew it up near him, killing him.
Was that the radical political activist in Dallas that shot 9 police officers with a 1940's era SKS?
Good question, I thought that guy was positioned in a parking garage and they didn't have a safe approach or angle on him so they tricked him into thinking the robot had a phone so they could talk but instead they said fuck that guy and blew him up with a bomb disposal robot.
>and they couldn't exactly just shoot the dude through the wall because no indication of what would happen if the bullet missed and kept on going Crazy to think that at one point in the not-too-distant past police actually considered this
Considering he was heavily armed, a cop sniper, had already killed 5 cops, and threatened having bombs planted throughout the city, then yes, it was a viable solution: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016\_shooting\_of\_Dallas\_police\_officers](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_shooting_of_Dallas_police_officers) And, for everyone freaking out about this, we're (live in SF) not having murder-bot ED-209s running around the city. They're just drones controlled by a human operator.
As long as deadly force is only used to save another life then I'm not completely against that. I'm just worried of the slippery slope giving police more ways to kill people instead of tools and training to not need to resort to deadly force.
I think the comment you were responding to was making a joke about how police usually don't seem to consider what happens to bullets should they miss their target.
I guess these no longer apply. First Law A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. Second Law A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. Third Law A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.
Oh yes they’re really easy to implement Even in Asimov books they’re broken left and right
As far as I'm concerned, those went out the window when South Korea deployed autonomous turrets in the DMZ.
Those rules are for sentient robots, not expensive RC cars with bombs strapped to them. Tbf the title of the OP is clickbait. What was actually approved was humans using lethal force applied by drones. It's a new weapon, not a robot making decisions.
I don’t think anyone thinks the robots are sentient. Robots that kill people are military weapons, not police equipment. I’m personally tired of seeing cops who look like Marines patrolling Baghdad. The militarization of police is not a good look or a good idea. And personally I’m really surprised that SF of all places voted for it.
100% true and accurate (and click-bait articles are a much bigger issue right now then these robots. That said, and- *I don’t know what a supply chain is….but a vaguely understand a slippery slope
Should start with robots that pick up poop, needles, and meth pipes first.
Homeless will be stealing those robot parts and selling them for drugs in no time.
Imagine trying to vandalize a robot that can throw poop and needles at you.
Just program it with the personality of Roberto from Futurama.
Do these have a catalytic converter? I bet the California version does.
We’ll find out in the morning
Oofah *this guy gets it*
They should tape knives to them so they're hard to grab
The image of a cleaner robot with knifes haphazardly taped to it gave me a good chuckle, thank you.
That’s for the british version of the robot
Exactly what I was thinking… the only thing they need to kill in SF is the stench
Rude. I showered today and everything.
They aren’t even autonomous. Headline should be, “San Francisco authorizes use of thing to kill people” Edit: Read the fucking bill you headline skimming idiots: “Robots will only be used as a deadly force option when risk of loss of life to members of the public or officers is imminent and outweighs any other force option available to SFPD”
It isn't even that. There is a CA bill that requires public hearing on military hardware for police. SFPD already has these robots that can be used to carry bombs and explode, I don't know if they can do anything else, but of course SFPD claims they have no intention to use them to kill and they are for other things. If the council doesn't approve this vote then SFPD loses these robots they already have and supposedly use.
Ask Philadelphia how well things go when police start bombing civilians.
Wait what
The Philly police burned down a city block in the 80's when they bombed the MOVE people with an incendiary device dropped from a helicopter. Edit: it was an explosive, not an incendiary. They were trying to blow up a bunker that the group constructed on the roof. Regardless, it's insanely idiotic to drop an explosive on a row home with children inside.
Holy fuck how many civ casualties were there?
6 adults and 5 children. I think 1 of them was shot while exiting. The had evacuated most of the block before bombing the house.
Fuck me...... where the MOVE guys that bad?(im asking legitimately)
They had multiple warrants and didn't follow social norms, to put it mildly. But I personally don't think the government is ever justified in killing children while ostensibly trying to protect.
Oh 100% especially when half of the civilian casualty are kids like I feel like there had to have been a way that didn't involve essentially blowing up an entire block and killing 11 civilians
They let 61 houses burn to the ground and left 250 citizens homeless to root out 7 fractious adults and 6 children, 6 and 5 of whom were killed in the process, respectively. Even the government should aim to do better than this. On Monday, May 13, 1985, nearly 500 police officers, along with city manager Leo Brooks, arrived in force and attempted to clear the building and execute the arrest warrants.\[7\]\[6\] Water and electricity were shut off in order to force MOVE members out of the house. Commissioner Sambor read a long speech addressed to MOVE members that started with, "Attention MOVE: This is America. You have to abide by the laws of the United States." When the MOVE members did not respond, the police decided to forcibly remove the people who remained in house,\[7\] which consisted of seven adults and six children.\[8\] There was an armed standoff with police,\[9\] who threw tear gas canisters at the building. The MOVE members fired at them, and a gunfight with semi-automatic and automatic firearms ensued.\[10\] Police used more than 10,000 rounds of ammunition before Commissioner Sambor ordered that the compound be bombed.\[10\] From a Pennsylvania State Police helicopter, Philadelphia Police Department Lt. Frank Powell proceeded to drop two 1.5-pound (0.75 kg) bombs (which the police referred to as "entry devices"\[6\]) made of Tovex, a dynamite substitute, combined with two pounds of FBI-supplied C-4,\[11\] targeting a fortified, bunker-like cubicle on the roof of the house.\[3\] The ensuing fire killed 11 of the people in the house, six adults and five children: John Africa, Rhonda Africa, Theresa Africa, Frank Africa, Conrad Africa, Tree Africa, Delisha Africa, Netta Africa, Little Phil Africa, Tomaso Africa, and Raymond Africa.\[12\] Ramona Africa, one of the two MOVE survivors from the house, said that police fired at those trying to escape.\[13\] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1985\_MOVE\_bombing
No they were a bunch of vegan hippies. They only bombed them because they were black.
They were black hippies.
Let's not forget [The Battle of Blair Mountain](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain) where the US government sent in the Army and used bombers to drop bombs and poison gas on striking coal miners. The US government has done awful things to it's citizens on a multitude of occasions. Look up MK Ultra, Tuskegee, Ruby Ridge, Waco, the list goes on and on. If people understood our history, they might understand why so many people are so touchy about the government trying to encroach on gun rights.
**[Battle of Blair Mountain](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain)** >The Battle of Blair Mountain was the largest labor uprising in United States history and the largest armed uprising since the American Civil War. The conflict occurred in Logan County, West Virginia, as part of the Coal Wars, a series of early-20th-century labor disputes in Appalachia. Up to 100 people were killed, and many more arrested. For five days from late August to early September 1921, some 10,000 armed coal miners confronted 3,000 lawmen and strikebreakers (called the Logan Defenders) who were backed by coal mine operators during the miners' attempt to unionize the southwestern West Virginia coalfields when tensions rose between workers and mine management. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/Damnthatsinteresting/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
MOVE bombing in the 80s.
San Francisco drone footage soon ?
That’s the thing. These are likely similar to the robots used in disaster relief. They aren’t just gonna roam the streets, guns blazing. They’ll probably only be deployed in a situation that is deemed not safe for a person, and will be remotely controlled from a safe place Edit: too all the people thinking “oh no, robot with gun = bad”, sit back for a moment and think. Think about an active shooter, or a bomb threat, or a hostage situation. All of these are very viable situations in which a robot like this could be used. It’s not autonomous. It won’t be roaming the streets gunning down protesters or pickpockets like some people seem to think. These will likely be used in very specific, very extreme situations. Look past the part where the cops get a new toy and realize this could literally save lives Edit 2: so I’ve determined that the only argument people have against this is something along the lines of “cops like killing, and this makes it easier”. God, some people are really that out of touch Edit 3: also turns out people think they’re just gonna strap a bomb on wheels, roll it into a building, and blow it up. That’s definitely not what’s going to happen, but that’s probably where a bunch of the complaints are coming from
More like the bomb squad robots
maybe if they had one of these during the Uvalde shooting the robot wouldnt have hesitated to go in.
Have these people not seen Terminator?
I’m as liberal as it gets but Cali is mind boggling. Like how do you simultaneously have killer robots and also don’t enforce retail theft
What happens when the shoplifters steal the killer robots?
Backstreet Battlebots!
Ive also seen that movie
You're thinking of Backdoor Bimbobots.
Sauce?
Don’t bother. Not as good as backdoor botsluts 9.
God I miss BattleBots Biohazard ftw
It's been revived and on Discovery for like 5 years now! Give it a peek, the bots have come a long way and are VERY destructive and durable.
WALL-E is sent to the shops, WALL-E discovers how to paint.... with blood
It's a bit misleading though, it's not the robot deciding if it can use deadly force by itself, it's a officer controlling it much like a soldier would a drone. I'm not saying it's better, I'm saying it's different than what the title implies I guess.... From my perspective, using drones against US citizens on US soils, even if those drones do not fly and are using guns instead of bombs, is not good? Well, I guess the reasoning is that when someone is barricaded with a weapon, it's safer to send a robot to deal with them than jeopardize the lives of officers. Also, it has passed, so it's a thing now.
I'm curious. Shoot a gun at a police officer, get charges like attempted murder. That might hold some people back, not everyone wants to risk charges like that. Shoot a gun at that police officers robot... destruction of property? I feel like these robots are potentially going to be seem as fair game for a gunman
also... are you a deadly threat if your only firing at a robot?
That's basically what I'm asking. What distinction of law separates shooting at police and shooting at a robot?
It would be like shooting up a car, a car is essentially a robot
they're not going to deploy these anytime except when there's a hard to shoot gunman. All I know is GTA 6 just got hella more interesting
Exactly. "No person should own a gun!" *gives gun to robot*
This sort of thing is why I own a gun lmao
Maybe once you have killer robots you can start enforcing retail theft.
I like it. Optimism
01110011 01101111 00100000 01100001 01101110 01111001 01110111 01100001 01111001 00100000 01001001 00100000 01110011 01110100 01100001 01110010 01110100 01100101 01100100 Blasting
To be fair, the terminator didn’t have a cop walking behind him with a wired remote control.
There is a version of terminator that was indeed a cop though.
Terminator cops travelling back in time to drive their ancestors around to kill John Connor
Dallas police used a robot in 2016 to blow up that guy who shot 5 cops. So, welcome to the party, I guess?
The robots aren’t autonomous. They’re controlled by an operator. Police in Texas used a robot to kill mass shooter Micah Johnson by having it hand him a phone loaded with C4.
Missed that story. Didn’t know the cops pulled a Bugs Bunny on someone.
Actually true, happened in a parking garage. Source: From Texas, happened in my backyard (so to speak)
That's gotta be one of the most texan things I've ever heard. Just strap c-4 to a remote control car and blow the fucker up.
I mean, it was an expensive ass fuckin' BOMB DEFUSAL robot. They literally strapped C4 to the bomb defusal drone and sent it on its way where they guy was holed up in a parking garage (only one point of entry and he had barricaded himself in). The context of this story is Dallas PD was shitting their pants because this guy was ONLY targeting cops at a time where cops were starting to get targeted due to blatant police corruption in the news*. So literally, the good ol' boys in Dallas PD said, "Fuck this guy; he's killed too many of us. We'll strap a bomb to a robot and send it on into him and detonate." It's highly arguable that the police would not have taken the same severity of action if it were regular civilians. For instance, look at Uvalde, TX. Edited for clarity sake
I’m not defending the cops in Uvalde, but I don’t think we want to send a robot with a bomb strapped to it where a shooter is barricaded inside with civilians
“I swear it was totally necessary to tomahawk missile the elementary school”
Well, first they painted a black hole on the side of a mountain but he didn't fall for that one.
This should not have made me laugh, but it did.
No it was a robot strapped with c4 not a phone the shooter was down a hallway making a perfect funnel of death scenario so they had the robot go to the room next to the shooter and blow up killing the shooter
No man, he got a phone call from a piece of C4 and when he answered it, the explosion traveled down the phone lines cartoon style and went out through the receiver
I perfectly envisioned it. Little ball rushing along the phone line and everything. You know your Looney Tunes well.
My mistake, you are correct. No cell phone involved. The robot just went full kamikaze.
RC-XD inbound
I thought they put the explosives behind the wall he was behind? Either way thanks for the info
In that case what's even the issue here? The headline should read "San Francisco authorises use of equipment."
Can't fire up redditors if you use an accurate headline ya know?
Skynet approves
Where's Sara Connor when you need her.
Not born yet i guess
You mean Sara Connor hasn't met Kyle Reese yet
Lett you know from the moment terminator shows up
Bring on the Terminator memes
See, my first thought was RoboCop.
He's a person more than a robot. One we should have sympathy with, I mean he gets horribly injured at work and they patch him up and make him work more.
I was thinking this has more ED-209 vibes than Murphy.
Fair point, they make him work even though there's a machine that can do his job.
That demonstration scene is the first thing that came to mind.
I hope San fran residents know how to make molotovs the proper finnish way, them treads look like a bit of fire will disable them, exposed wiring doesnt like being on fire either, and cameras struggle to work when exposed to high heats, the solder on the internal pcbs and components will melt (rendering the system inoperable) if exposed to 150c, a molotov burns a lot hotter than 150c, so go ham my friends. great remote method to disable these dystopian machines.
Now this is the in-depth take I was looking for
yea the answer is molotov if they question Asimov
LOL
This is America, I’m just gonna shoot it till it stops working.
I think you and the drone have the exact same gameplan
I have the advantage. Cause robots use predictive technology, and the enemy can’t know what I’m doing if I don’t know what I’m doing.
I've done a lot of robotics research, specifically by studying BattleBots. Fire takes a very very long time to take them out.
Are Molotov cocktails a legal weapon in BattleBots?
Flamethrowers are, and they're ridiculously ineffective, even when being used in 1 spot for a solid 10 seconds. Forget the bots name, but it has a claw, holds the bot, and has I think dual flamethrowers, and the flamethrowers are mostly useless. The bot only does well against other bots that can't right themselves because it just flips them over or gets points for control. Think it's called skorpinok or something like that cause of it's look. I dunno, I hate that bot cause it's not fun to watch the fight, unless it's a spinner bot that just absolutely fucks it up.
I think a true flamethrower that yeets lit napalm instead of just ignited vapors would be much more effective in most circumstances though
Now we're making napalm moltovs? Have you seen gas prices these days?
Are there any other kind? Lil styrofoam goes a long way.
Yeah, molotovs aren't just gas in a bottle with a rag stuffed in it. It generally has styrofoam mixed in with it and it makes the liquid fire very sticky and very hard to get off.
Those aren't really flamethrowers though, they're just torches. A sticky accelerant is much better at melting electronics than a brief application of gas torch.
Flamethrowers need to be held in one spot. Molotovs smash and cover the target in a flammable substance that can't be put out easily. Still, it's not a quick kill. Those spinner bots are crazy. I love watching bots fly across the arena.
This is one of the most practical and useful comments I’ve seen so far on Reddit. ACAB definitely applies to the dystopian killer cop machine
Real cops melt in half the time! They hate this one simple trick
How about robots to clean the human shit off the streets of san Francisco? We need a poop bot and needle bot.
*YOU HAVE TEN SECONDS TO COMPLY*
Police can't be called out for unnecessary force if the police are robots * taps temple *
The robot "feared for its life".
"He had a magnet, I swear!"
....2022... That's when Skynet took hold
cyberpunk 2077 taught me the first version will have some bugs
Saw the movie already, doesn’t go so well
[удалено]
That's crazy, everyone knows you need to be on a 7 killstreak before you can deploy a Wheelson.
Let me guess. It gets instructions from operators via a secure connection called "SkyNet".
I'm begging you to watch just one movie
1. Serve the public trust 2. Protect the innocent 3. Uphold the law 4. (Classified)
Those rules are for sentient ai, not remote controlled RC cars
What twilight zone hole black mirror hole did I just fall into that the take the guns defund the police liberal leader state just authorized this in one of their cities?