Machine Gun Sentry Robot Unveiled

mpthompson writes "Samsung has partnered with a Korean university to develop a robotic sentry equipped with a 5.5mm machine gun. Meant for deployment along the DMZ between North and South Korea, the $200,000 robot employs sophisticated pattern recognition software for targeting humans. No three laws here, but the robot does include a speaker that can be used to politely issue a warning before taking the target out. The promotional video is both scary and funny at the same time."

OMG!

[novus ordo (843883)]

real-life aimbot

Re:OMG!

[IchBinEinPenguin (589252)]

real-life aimbot

with real-dead victims!

Re:OMG!

[SnowZero (92219)]

Think about the alternatives... Given the 1+ million strong army north of the border, and the questionable sanity of the leader controlling it, that border must be defended. The numerical superiority means some defenses must be automated, leaving land mines as the only existing technology. This robot is far better than a land mine however; It can be switched off, can be configured to give a warning, and can be removed easily when it is no longer needed. Land mines have none of these properties.

Would it be nice to live in a world where such things were not needed? Of course. I'm not going to blame the South Koreans at all though, given the realities of their situation. Maybe it will even let more countries sign the land mine treaty/ban. The US, for example, could buy these for defending Guantanamo, and remove the land mines we have placed there.

Re:OMG!

[itwerx (165526)]

This robot is far better than a land mine...

That does bring up an interesting question - can it withstand a mine blast?
      (Cue the Homer "Doh!" as they all get blown to smithereens within hours of deployment. :)

Re:OMG!

[e2d2 (115622)]

No. Simple fact is a lot of those mines in the DMZ were designed to stop tracked vehicles, not foot soldiers, although I'm sure a foot soldier would fare much worse against one if somehow triggered. There is a big difference between a small anti-personnel mine and an anti-tank mine (Hey uncle sam, you can't say I never learned anything in the Army!).

But that being said this robot is designed to patrol a known area where the users know the locations of the mines, because they planted them. The robot is created to take men out of harms way and serve as an ever watchful eye. If an attack comes this is not the last defense, only the first.

Re:OMG!

[Miaowara_Tomokato (757775)]

Mines will get improved for better killing capabability,

Mines are not designed to kill - they are designed to blow someone's legs off and leave them screaming on the battlefield. Psychological effects aside, this design choice is very economical. Killing a soldier takes one person out of a war. Maiming them takes not only the victim out, but also the one or two soldiers who carry them back, the supplies to transport them to medical facilities, a bed in the hospital, and the time of the medical staff treating them.

It's the intent to maim bit that caused mines to be banned (plus the fact that no one cleans them up after a conflict).

Re:OMG!

[jamstar7 (694492)]

This robot is far better than a land mine however; It can be switched off, can be configured to give a warning, and can be removed easily when it is no longer needed.

If these things are radio-controlled, they can be hacked. Don't think the North Koreans won't be working on that. And speaking from experience of my misspent youth 30ish years ago, I can categorically say it's easier to defeat an electronic/mechanical/computerised system than it is to defeat a Mark 1 calibrated eyeball. Gotta love statutes of limitation. I'm thinking Sanyo's gonna make a killing (no pun intended) at $200k per.

Land mines have none of these properties.

Dumb mines are dirt cheap, too. Not a whole lot of markup or chances for cost overruns and such. And they have a proven track record of area denial.

Would it be nice to live in a world where such things were not needed?

Absolutely. Unfortunately, they won't sell anybody a shuttle ticket to that world. Know any sane, moral, legal way to change human nature? I don't. It gets me when I hear somebody say things like 'Well, if we don't provoke them, they'll leave us alone' and 'If we all give up our guns, the world will be SUCH a better place. Great idea. You first.

The US, for example, could buy these for defending Guantanamo, and remove the land mines we have placed there.

Or, here's a thought. Buy a few thousand of these for 'inner city urban warfare' er, 'police useage'. Yeah, that would work. I'm just curious if any counters to them that show up on the Internet would be considered covered by the Second Amendment.

Yeah, I love my country. My government, OTOT, scares me shitless...

Mines

[Anonymous Coward]

Would it be nice to live in a world where such things were not needed? Of course. I'm not going to blame the South Koreans at all though, given the realities of their situation. Maybe it will even let more countries sign the land mine treaty/ban. The US, for example, could buy these for defending Guantanamo, and remove the land mines we have placed there.

Realistically the land mine treaty is a waste of time. Mines will not be abolished from the battlefield for the forseeable future because they are an extremely effective weapon. Here you have a simple device that can be deployed by minimally skilled troops, it is cheap to manufacture, hard to detect and neutralize and can be deployed from aircraft with great speed for rapid denial-of-terrain as the US military likes to call it. Of all the things that tank commanders fear, they fear mines the most. You can see or detect another tank or a helicopter before it strikes, you can even stand a chance to evade, detect or even destroy and LGB or a missile with a counter measures system but a mine the tank commander can't see or detect rapidly in combat. The same pretty much goes for the infantry, they fear few things as much as mines and snipers. Here is an object that costs what? $50 to manufacture that has the power to scare the shit out of the crew of an M1 Abrams tank that costs $4.3 millon to make and better yet it stands a very good chance of destroying it. You can't beat that combination in terms of value-for-money. Trying to ban mines, land or naval, will go the same way that the various attempts back in the 1930s to outlaw the areal bombing of civillians. It is deplorable, but unfortunately also true.

Re:Mines

[James McGuigan (852772)]

Anti-personnel mines are fairly harmless against a tank and anti-tank mines can be disarmed by a person. So often they are used together, an anti-tank mine surounded by anti-personnel mines.

Re:Mines

[budgenator (254554)]

if you're losing the war, you'll do anything at all to get ahead
Well there is the real problem, the land mine gets used by desperate armies fight there to a loss. When we use the mines, the G8 type countries, putting one out involves a shit-pile of paper work and most often keeping personel on site to physically observe the mine field. A lot of times, an area will be marked as mined, a couple hundred holes dug and then maybe 3 or 4 mines place at the edge. Then when we leave all the mines hgave to be recovered, hense the paperwork. A lot of times we see mines being used aren't in warfare but in genocide.

Re:OMG!

[ricky-road-flats (770129)]

Think about the alternatives... Given the 1+ million strong army north of the border, and the questionable sanity of the leader controlling it, that border must be defended.

I see what you're saying - the Mexican government is going to be *really* interested in this!

Re:OMG!

[mutube (981006)]

It could get worse though if some off-shore programmer detects a way to detect U.S. citizens.

BMI [wikipedia.org].

Re:OMG!

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, I haven't had to go through 3 blogs to get to the source article before. Here it is: the article [metimes.com].

We're Winning Again

[Doc Ruby (173196)]

I guess after a half-century mediation by America and China, the Korean Peninsula conflict has degenerated into the Crazy Olympics.

Re:We're Winning Again

[cold fjord (826450)]

degenerated into the Crazy Olympics

Degenerated? "Crazy Olympics?"

It isn't even a contest. South Korea is left setting on the bench, consoled by its modern economy and democracy. The field is North Korea [globalsecurity.org] all the way.

North Korea has the:
Gold [guardian.co.uk]
Silver [timesonline.co.uk]
Bronze [nysun.com]
Runner Up [heritage.org]
and "Miss Congeniality" [globalsecurity.org]

With the recently added [bbc.co.uk] events [bbc.co.uk], they could be in an even better medal position next year.

I think that North Korea's official motto must be the inverse of Google's.

Re:We're Winning Again

[Fulcrum of Evil (560260)]

Just because the war ended

The war didn't end. That requires a surrender or peace treaty.

Overpriced and vulnerable

[Harmonious Botch (921977)]

We need some improvements in pattern recognition before this is a feasible idea. There is a lot of cognitive processing that goes into seemingly simple decisions like 'Is this a person?' and 'Is this person an enemy?' and 'Is this person armed?'
It does not appear to have the capacity to tell the difference between an unarmed intruder and a heavily armed one, so defeating it is not hard: Approach it with some kind of heavier firepower, and while it talks, you blow it away.

And 200K? For 200 I could do the same thing: a home-depot motion sensor, a voice chip with loudspeaker, and a handful of fertilizer/oil land mines.

Re:Overpriced and vulnerable

[NinjaFarmer (833539)]

I think there should be an international treaty banning all lethal weapons without a brain attached to the trigger.

Oh come on!

[Anonymous Coward]

You can't just up and *ban* the U.S. Marines!

More information needed.

[Kadin2048 (468275)]

I think there should be an international treaty banning all lethal weapons without a brain attached to the trigger.

In what way must the brain be attached? Would duct tape work? How about staples?

Yeah, but...

[Leuf (918654)]

And 200K? For 200 I could do the same thing: a home-depot motion sensor, a voice chip with loudspeaker, and a handful of fertilizer/oil land mines.

Yeah, but when yours gets hit by lightning will Ally Sheedy be able to dance with it? I think not.

Mod parent down "missing the point"

[adamkennedy (121032)]

It's a machine gun for the Korean demilitarised zone.

There's nobody in there that isn't an enemy, and there's nobody in there that isn't armed (or at least, it doesn't matter if they are or not).

And if it accidentally shoots the odd deer, then nobody cares.

Further, the whole point of talking is to prevent accidents with North Korean troops seen by accident out fishing or something.

You can bet your ass at the first sign of real trouble, they'll all be set to "kill on sight".

Take another look at the context of where this thing will be actually used, then try commenting again.

Re:Overpriced and vulnerable

[NeutronCowboy (896098)]

Unfortunately, this would destroy one of the cool developments in the DMZ: a refuge for wild animals. Occasionally, they seem to lose some animals to tripwires and landmines, but nothing too much. This stuff would just mean that the DMZ would become a dead zone. I hope that the pattern recognition they use can actually distinguish a crane from a human (and a human camuflaged as a crane from a crane).

Re:Overpriced and vulnerable

[itwerx (165526)]

What's with all this talk about humans and wild animals and newfangled killer robots and stuff in the DMZ?!?
      I remember the days when all we had in our DMZ was servers, and we liked it that way!
      Kids these days...

Re:Overpriced and vulnerable

[GORby_ (101822)]

You've obviously never seen a scared turtle...

Re:Overpriced and vulnerable

[v1 (525388)]

You would be amazed what alarms a cat can trip off when they enter "neurotic mode". My cat has repeatedly tripped off a "pet proof" system of dual motion sensors with "pet guard" features. The IR requires a body mass larger than a large dog to trip and the radar is aimed at the 4 ft level and above, both must trip at the same time to trigger the alarm. I'd love to be in the house to see what he's doing to trigger it. Nearest I can figure is he's either flying several feet off the floor while turning corners or is throwing things at the sensors.

Re:Overpriced and vulnerable

[blincoln (592401)]

I assume it's just using motion detection. The video looks like a more advanced version of the homebrew airsoft sentry gun that a hobbyist put together last year (I'd post a link, but he took down the site and replaced it with a page implying he was taking it commercial).

Basically what his software did was compare the previous frame and the current one, then draw a bounding box around things that had changed. That's all this system appears to be doing, except instead of aiming for the center of the box, it is estimating where the target's head is.

I For One...

[Anonymous Coward]

Am tired of the same old joke.

I WANT ONE!

[the_hoser (938824)]

This thing would pwn jehova's witnesses!

Re:I WANT ONE!

[Daniel Dvorkin (106857)]

He's not talking about murdering people because of their religious beliefs. He's talking about murdering people because they come to your home, annoy the living shit out of you, won't take no for an answer, and occasionally shout threats at your children (true story.) While murder may be a little harsh for such an offense, I don't think there's anyone who hasn't been bothered by these nutcases who hasn't felt the urge now and then.

Re:Apparently,

[Firehed (942385)]

You have never been mid-thrust in an awesome sexual encounter when the doorbell rings, and some smarmy ass-hole in Sunday best is at the door telling you about their imaginary man in the sky, and how he can save your soul.

And you have? Come on, this is Slashdot. Righty doesn't count.

(sorry, I was going to mod you up, but the opportunity was just too good)

Re:You got me wrong.

[antifoidulus (807088)]

So Euler was an idiot? Pascal an idiot? Newton an idiot? Wow, you must have contributed so much to the field of scientific endeavor, because you are certainly riding one mighty high horse there. Maybe you should actually calm down and see that not everyone views the world in the same way you do, and that has no bearing on their intelligence. Or maybe just grow up and realize that you are not in fact the smartest person in the world and if you are going to claim that others are idiots, you might want to check who that group includes first.

Funny that you mention wikipedia, have you ever looked at the articles on various religions in there(hint, they are there). Ever notice how some very well educated believers contribute material to the articles on their respective religions? Are you claiming you are in fact smarter than all those people?

Every world religion count(s/ed) among its adherents some of the smartest people ever to walk this earth, there are some insanely smart people who believe in no religion at all. My point? Believing in a religion has no bearing on your intelligence, and you are an arrogant fool to say otherwise.

Lets just hope...

[shadwwulf (145057)]

it doesn't like to hunt for it's own bacon.

Polite Warning!

[DuranDuran (252246)]

> politely issue a warning before taking the target out

I could have given them some to use:
"Dead or alive, you're coming with me!"
"Your move, creep!"
"Stay out of trouble!"
And the list goes on.

But knowing them, I bet they'll just go with "You have 20 seconds to comply".

Re:Polite Warning!

[Jarjarthejedi (996957)]

"Ah-ah, I know what you're thinking, punk. You're thinking, 'Did he fire six shots or only five?' And to tell you the truth, I've deleted that information in all the excitement. But being as this is a 5.5 caliber machine gun, a reasonably priced weapon for developing nations, and has nigh infinite ammo, you've got to ask yourself a question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, PUNK?"

Re:Polite Warning!

[mibus (26291)]

Or, NUMBER FIVE IS ALIVE!!

Re:Polite Warning!

[LordEd (840443)]

It looks like you are entering my firing range. Would you like help with this feature?

Humans are easy...

[clambake (37702)]

But can it tell the difference between trees and... aliens?

Interesting if used a little different...

[mkettler (6309)]

I could very much see something like this being very useful in the US if the armament was different. I'm picturing something armed with essentially a paintball gun loaded with balls of marker dye... Might be very useful for places like prisons, etc. It might even be useful as a part of a bank security system. Have it mark them with paint as they leave..

Of course, the liability of it hitting someone in the eye would be a killer, but it is at least interesting to think about what could be done with such a system if armed with non-lethal weaponry.

Re:Interesting if used a little different...

[NMerriam (15122)]

You point out something I have always found amusing. Let's say someone breaks into your home, in most states you are within your legal rights to kill them. However, in all states that I am aware of, if you setup a trap you are not only liable but criminally liable.

Yeah, and there's nothing amusing about it. A fireman or paramedic will set off a booby trap just as readily as a burglar will. You aren't allowed to kill ANYONE who walks through your door, only those with criminal intent (and in many states, only those who present a direct physical threat). Since booby traps are incapable of making those judgments, they're illegal.

Korean border!?!?

[tomz16 (992375)]

I'm sold! Imagine how much better we will all be able to sleep once these bad boys are deployed along the Canadian border!

Re:Korean border!?!?

[nacturation (646836)]

... pointing South.
 

Samsung we are the future

[Charcharodon (611187)]

After being thwarted yet a third time in the past, Skynet outsourced time line assassinations to Samsung and the rest they say is history.

Welcome to the Free World?

[rolfwind (528248)]

When people escaped the DDR (East Germany), specifically over the Berlin Wall - the West Germans helped them in any way possible with open arms, short of provoking war.

Now we shoot them?

Long List of Problems

[Wes Janson (606363)]

As others have pointed out, this concept has a tremendous number of issues that would have to be overcome for it to be worthwhile. First off, these units would be incredibly vulnerable to long-distance fire from heavy-caliber anti-material rifles. It's practically the most ideal target imaginable for a .50 BMG shooter: large, immobile, limited lethal range, and no human suffering upon destruction. Anyone else notice that those prototypes look to have M249 SAWs in them? You can see the tail end of a belt feeding in during part of the video, and it's the most likely possibility for a small 5.56 belt-fed. Except there doesn't seem to be any provisions for decent ammo storage. That tiny box that the weapon sits in isn't nearly large enough to hold more than a hundred rounds or so at most, and it doesn't really look like the weapon is designed to be fed from the base (ammo exposed to the elements; feeding issues; turret rotation and elevation interfering with feeding). Overall, it looks pretty well useless.

Those are the main problems you see?

[caitsith01 (606117)]

What about:

- inability of current computer vision and AI technology to make sufficiently informed decisions about threats

- massive moral issue of allowing an autonomous device to kill humans without specific targeting by a human operator

- probable violations of laws of war and humanitarian laws as a result of the above

- fact that military-industrial complex can waste money on shit like this when there are people starving on the same planet

I see these as slightly more problematic than whether it has enough frigging ammo.

the coolest part...

[sTalking_Goat (670565)]

they use the theme song from Pirates of the Caribbean as the soundtrack to their promotional vid...

Thank god it was Samsung

[neuro.slug (628600)]

Could you imagine if Microsoft made this robot?

Robo-sentry.NET Vista Live: It looks like you're trying to enter a demilitarized zone! Would you like to:

• Go back the way you came?
• Be riddled with bullets?
• Have me fetch Steve Ballmer to pwn you?

Either that, or they'd try and sell trespassers V1AGRA

On threads like these, turn off the "funny"...

[posterlogo (943853)]

Seriously, if you want to learn anything when it comes to threads like these, tune your preferences to demote posts marked "funny". You'll be amazed.

How long until smartguns?

[FleaPlus (6935)]

This makes me wonder how long it'll be until this sort of tech gets miniaturized enough to fit on a portable gun, so we end up with people toting Aliens-style M56 Smart Guns [wikipedia.org]. You could imagine it being coupled with some sort of friendly-fire deterrence system like they use with aircraft.