-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
AI, UAS & the end of manned platforms . . . .
- Thread starter robav8r
- Start date
Wow! I’ll bet you could fit a lot of those in an aircraft carrier. If each one could carry 1lb of HE, fewer than half surviving to the target would equal just over two Hellfire missiles.
For every advance in warfare someone inevitably comes up with a counter to it, and nowadays we don't even have to wait for weapons to be fielded to have countermeasures developed in some cases.
All I noticed was camera operator sucked. And formation at end was worse than I saw in the training command. I thought Hornets were clap on clap off?
Pretty sure I could make that entire swarm go dumb in about 15 seconds.
Or at least ensure they’d only ever be able to produce daughters...
When I think of everything going unmanned I immediately think about "Battlestar Galactica" (the new one, not the old cheesefest...). Everything can be countered, jammed, or hacked with enough effort. I for one hope that we never completely trust a machine to do our fighting for us, as even the best security can be compromised. Just like our ground guys are re-learning nearly forgotten concepts like Land Navigation with a map and compass, we need to make sure we keep pilots in the loop basically forever. This doesn't mean we should take a luddite approach and not also incorporate unmanned tech as well, but we need a balance.
jRiot504
Well-Known Member
There is an active area of research in mathematics and computer science involving Formal Verification Methods. A brief overview Quanta Article - Hacker-Proof Code Confirmed. This doesn't mean we are letting machines fight as someone would still pilot the drones or other technological advances, but the systems are designed to ensure they can't be hacked into or if one part of the system is hacked into, it is mathematically impossible to move into other areas of the system. Complexity quickly scales as the entire system needs to be designed in this manner from the hardware up. I believe in the article I linked or I read elsewhere there is a research team working on these solutions DeepSepc.
There will always be a way to defeat technology, and if someone told me their system was hackproof I would ask them if a bridge in Brooklyn came along with that promise.
jRiot504
Well-Known Member
Those who built the Enigma machine knew the Enigma machine wasn't hack proof, just low probability it would be cracked. Only those in charge likely claimed it was hack proof. Such as RSA encryption isn't hack proof, but low to zero probability due to the computational complexity of the algorithm required to break it i.e., it takes too long, which is why we use it. I am certain the engineers, computer scientists and mathematicians will explain to the DOD or respective agency using their work the limitations but more than likely will hear only what they want/need to hear.
Certain systems can be mathematically impossible to break but are unable to be designed/implemented due to current constraints, which is why I mentioned the overall complexity.
Even if the drone is hack proof doesn't make it missile proof.
Jesus Christ. Y’all are acting like you’re the only ones to have thought of “networks can be hacked”. No shit. We’ve all seen “Battlestar”.
There will always be a human in the loop. Even if the technology is there, the political risk-will to allow a robot weapons release authority isn’t. And I can tell you that there’s a long way to go to even have routine operations be totally autonomous.
Right now UAS reduces the risk to human pilots. That’s all. It’s good for that.
There will always be a human in the loop. Even if the technology is there, the political risk-will to allow a robot weapons release authority isn’t. And I can tell you that there’s a long way to go to even have routine operations be totally autonomous.
Right now UAS reduces the risk to human pilots. That’s all. It’s good for that.
And yet we still get folks who claim systems can be 'hack proof', the worrisome part is that folks higher up the food chain will believe stuff like that and think UAV's are ready for far more than just reducing risk right now.
The ‘folks’ aren’t the one designing and operating the systems. Yeah, people up the chain and defense-blog wonks have ideas and opinions, but just as with manned platforms, that doesn’t mean that’s what’s actually getting fielded.