Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Autonomous drone defeats human champions in racing first

tudelft.nl

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 342 posts

Re: Autonomous drone defeats human champions in racing first

#281

Post by trhway »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #275
trhway wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>drones smart enough to dodge bullets well, there will be similarly smart "predator"/defense drones. The humans will have no chances on such a battlefield populated by thousands drones per square kilometer fighting each other. >The tech industry is working hard to bring about the Terminator future. And i think removing people from the battlefield is a good thing. >or at least dodge out of where guns are pointing just…

About your last paragraph: High level, I generally agree, but when you dive deeper to look at the numbers, I doubt that you can have 1000 USD drones that can fly at 200 mph/320 km/h. One quarter of that speed, I could believe.

quad - no. Plane type - very doable.

Re: Autonomous drone defeats human champions in racing first

#282

Post by AngryData »

pjc50 wrote: post #184
AngryData wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Im more worried about these type of things causing us to blast each other and ourselves back to the 1920s or so during conflicts when small explosive EMPs start being viewed as less damaging than drones and robots. A fast explosive on the back of a neodynium magnet and a few coils of copper can make a hell of an EMP blast. The only reason we don't use them now is due to all the collateral damage, but if drone bombs r…

> A fast explosive on the back of a neodynium magnet and a few coils of copper can make a hell of an EMP blast. I'm having a hard time believing this is effective. > The only reason we don't use them now is due to all the collateral damage Russians don't care about collateral damage and there doesn't seem to be any evidence of them using such weapons?

Nobody really uses much undirected EM warfare in my opinion because it represents a huge escalation in a war, similar to the use of indiscriminate chemical weapons, or even nuclear weapons.

It would be devastating in the local battlefield, potentially frying radio or other equipment depending on the size of the device or how close you could lob it towards the enemy before going off; but with the low wattages many non-military communication devices use today you would also be blasting horrible noise to all of them beyond the local area and disrupting communications across potentially multiple neutral countries.

It would be a large act of aggression against any countries around them and NATO, and at scale possibly even piss off far away countries like the US and China. Especially large EMP devices could even be temporarily misidentified as a nuclear explosion and gain the immediate full attention by any nuclear powers watching out for it.

Re: Autonomous drone defeats human champions in racing first

#283

Post by jiggawatts »

IshKebab wrote: post #246
akie wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If we are ok with AI drones autonomously choosing bombing targets, then you're right.

I think Ukraine would be ok with AI drones launched next to a Russian airfield autonomously choosing targets... I expect Russia will be ok with it in any situation.

Obviously the Russians wouldn't be one hundred percent okay with drones autonomously choosing targets in or near Russian airfields...

Re: Autonomous drone defeats human champions in racing first

#284

Post by cluckindan »

roughly wrote: post #36
cluckindan wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If by burrito you mean shaped charge high explosives with lethal shrapnel, triggered by facial recognition, delivered by drones the size of house sparrows at the speed of sound, then yes, burrito delivery.

Christ, you sound like my nutritionist.

Go, Forth and multiply matrices.

Re: Autonomous drone defeats human champions in racing first

#285

Post by CommanderData »

pjc50 wrote: post #249
IshKebab wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$4k per drone... ouch.

A lot of money if you're a UK benefits recipient, not a lot of money for a piece of military equipment. Slightly more than the annual allowance of one asylum seeker. Whole program is about a third of the cost of a Type 26 Frigate.

The asylum seeker comparison is interesting.

While I want to reduce the number, I can't but help think how we essentially create them in the first place by destroying the countries which create the economic conditions they flee from.

Re: Autonomous drone defeats human champions in racing first

#286

Post by arrowsmith »

tremon wrote: post #202
arrowsmith wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Most people don't want to murder innocents" isn't reassuring. It only takes one lunatic. And there's a lot of lunatics out there.

Then the proper solution is to create fewer lunatics: provide better mental health support, good social safety nets, and a more egalitarian society.

Well yes, but that's a utopian idea that can never be fully realised. You can't fix them all. There'll always be some number of crazy, broken, malevolent psychos out there. If you don't think this is true then you need to meet more people.

We need to minimise the damage they can cause, and that means preventing them from using slaughterbots.

Re: Autonomous drone defeats human champions in racing first

#288

Post by worldsayshi »

lolc wrote: post #148
worldsayshi wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The obvious counter to a laser could be 'more drones'? And maybe just have the drones sneak up close to the ground.

I always hear this sneak up thing and think about how birds can be caught with netting. And all the barbed wire in old battlefields. I don't think drones will be able to meaningfully sneak up to a laser. Of course more drones works. But more drones here is less drones there. It means lasers are an effective deterrent against opportunistic attacks.

Sure but i would expect a laser to be at least 10x more expensive than a drone. Would you need 10 sneaky drones to overwhelm a laser?

Re: Autonomous drone defeats human champions in racing first

#289

Post by joha4270 »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #278
htrp wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you can get a GPS fix (or a lat long to start), you can run an INS just as easily.

Most of the conversation here is focused on cheap drones. Are there cheap Inertial Navigation Systems (INS)? As I understand, it only appears inside of multi-million dollar cruise/ballistic missiles, fighter jets, and long-range bombers. Please correct me if I am wrong. Also, it might be that there are cheap INS systems that are good enough (e.g., "close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades"), plus a bit of AI…

Yes, you can buy an IMU as a single IC for less than $5[1]. Otherwise your smartphone probably already have all the required sensors.

Of course, those have significantly less performance than the one you put in an airliner or ballistic missile.

As you mention yourself, its a question of good enough. You need to be a lot more accuracy to hit a city after a twenty minute sub-orbital coast, than to find the nearby trench. And yes, computer vision is used to correct for drift.

[1]: IMU's on DigiKey: https://www.digikey.com/en/products/filter/motion-sensors/im...

Re: Autonomous drone defeats human champions in racing first

#290

Post by lupusreal »

akie wrote: post #199
close04 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which have a payload and sometimes a fiber optic cable The optic cable is for the human pilot. An AI piloted drone doesn't need it.

If we are ok with AI drones autonomously choosing bombing targets, then you're right.

It's been done before, specifically in the naval context.
Post reply on HN