Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

South Korea To Develop Army and Police Robots

Posted by samzenpus on Wed Jan 18, 2006 11:14 PM
from the you-have-twenty-seconds-to-comply dept.
Robotics Technology
JonathanGCohen writes "South Korea is planning on developing an advanced line of robots for military and police use by the 2010 decade. A $34 million USD infusion of cash will spur development and result in robotic applications like security watchmen and eight-legged autonomous combat vehicles. "
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

South Korea To Develop Army and Police Robots 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Smart Robots? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by mfh (56)

    Smart robots need three basic functions of sensing, processing and action. Thus far, robotics researchers have tried to cram the three into a single dummy, causing expenses to soar. [...] Instead, the planned robots will be receiving most sensing and processing capabilities via a Web connection. Only the ability of movement will be located in the robot.

    Nothing could possibly go wrong, there. Clones [slashdot.org] will have a better chance of getting the job done than web vulnerable policing units carrying live ammo.

    • spiders robots? come'on, it's so much easier -though less stylish- just pressing buttons and nuking the weak guys. i guess korean politicians and stakeholders are /. material, major geeks with the hazardous add-on of unlimited funding... i can't wait to see a combat between brazilian robot bees and peruvian mechanical guinea pigs
    • Too bad the scientist who claimed he could make clones turned out to be a fraud. They will just have to settle for an army of droids.

    • Being that Americans don't hardly even get killed anymore when they wage their war every 10 years because of our superior technology, I see the next incarnation of war to be a big battlebot war or something.

      I would say that even that is progress. Hell, even then maybe wars won't cost us so much. People pay to go to arenas like in the days of gladiators. (I'm not sure if they paid or it was free.) But still, picture a football sized arena, and the lights go down and its US vs N. Korea. Of course WMDs wo

  • Haven't we explored this option before? (Score:5, Funny)

    by MagicDude (727944) on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:17PM (#14506792)
    Please put down your weapon. You have 20 seconds to comply.
  • Will they be able to find Sarah Connor?

    Oops, wrong web site.

    /slashie

  • Although the article says they intend for the robot to take action, surely they couldn't be doing much more than photographing any evil-dooers they come across as chasing down and following people would be quite a challenge. Although, imagine how awesome a giant six legged horse/spider roaming the streets at night would be.

  • Robots watching robots (Score:5, Funny)

    by zymurgy_cat (627260) on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:19PM (#14506810) Homepage
    I wonder....will the robot security guards watch robot football all night long when I visit my customers' plants on the midnight shift....or rather, when my robot visits the plant for me......

  • Isaac Asimov would not have liked this! (Score:3, Interesting)

    by yobjob (942868) on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:20PM (#14506811) Homepage
    The government also seeks to build combat robots. Three Laws of Robotics: 1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

    2. A robot must obey orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

    3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

  • North Korea (Score:3, Funny)

    by mickyflynn (842205) on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:21PM (#14506820)
    If i lived next door to a crazy, nuclear-armed country with a million-man infantry, then i'd probably want a technological upperhand as well on the battlefield. However, as wars are always going to be fought no matter what, i'm willing to put my boots on the ground for honour and glory and hopefully some metals... so joining the army. god damned robots better not screw me over on the only thing left that seems to be hiring... graduating with an english degree in May. what else can I do?

  • Cold, emotionless, enforcement drones ... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Average_Joe_Sixpack (534373) on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:22PM (#14506828)
    In the US we call them "State Troopers"
  • ... the freakin' sharks with laser beams!
  • only old people listen to police robots!

  • That bothers me. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by WindBourne (631190) on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:23PM (#14506839) Journal
    In the USA, the military is not allowed to interfere with civilian matters (that was until recently). One of the advantages of this, is that it is so enforced in the military, that most would rebel against any attempted military coup or an attempt to convert America to a dictatorship. But a robot will not likely have a sense of ethics. They would gladly do exactly what the current leader says, be it Clinton (for you republicans) or GWB (for the rest of us).

  • Marriage? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by saskboy (600063) on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:25PM (#14506853) Homepage Journal
    What happens though when the Robot Police want to marry the Robot Teachers:
    http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/ 04/0338238&tid=216&tid=146 [slashdot.org] ?

    Will Robosexual unions be allowed under South Korean law?

    And just wait until the messy Robodivorces when Robot Police Lady rolls off with Robot Soldier:
    http://hardware.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/09/ 25/0218254&tid=216&tid=219 [slashdot.org]

    And they haven't even invented Robot Lawyers yet! The world will come tumbling down.
  • The world would be a much better place if we could ensure all wars are fought with only robots on BOTH sides. Think of all the human lives which would be saved.

  • Jump a head to the end goal (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Belseth (835595) on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:33PM (#14506881)
    Already the leaders stay home and play armchair warfare. Next step is the soldiers stay home and play war like a video game. It's been around for years folks, it's called Robot Wars. I say the leaders of each country build the best fighting robot then they can duke it out and nobody gets hurt and we save billions of dollars. Got a border dispute? Whoever can build the best fighting machine wins? It levels the playing field, saves time and money and by far the most important it saves lives. Don't like a level playing field? Try talking out your problems like civilized people do.

    • Re:Jump a head to the end goal (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Draveed (664730) on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:50PM (#14506974)
      Why bother building a fighting machine? If you're just going to turn warfare into a little game, just have some humans play an existing game to solve your problem. Have the 2 nations each pick a soldier for a boxing match or even just a game of poker. It's all the same. You're just trying to take the killing and destruction out of warfare.

      The problem is that your system relies on trust. How can I trust that my enemy is only going to confine this combat to the "fighting machine arena" or poker table, or whatever? You can't. Your enemy may just backstab you, and while you're only ready for your sanitized combat, they lunch a real attack on your cities. So you need to prepare for that and spend billions on a conventional army anyway.

    • What you're missing here is that the robots built for war won't be built to kill other machines - they'll be built to penetrate deep beyond enemy defense and inflict the maximum possible casualties appropriate for the situation, all without putting a human pilot in danger.

  • ED-209 (Score:2, Redundant)

    by modemboy (233342)
    And they shall call it Enforcement Droid 209. Oh wait, 8 legs, make that Ed-809 ;-)

  • I, for one, (Score:5, Funny)

    by Douglas Simmons (628988) on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:36PM (#14506896) Homepage
    I, for one, welcome our incoming flood of posts in this syntax.

  • So... (Score:3, Funny)

    by deblau (68023) <slashdot.25.flickboy@spamgourmet.com> on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:37PM (#14506901) Journal
    which are they going to develop first, their Army or their Police Robots?
  • I like this four-legged design [wikipedia.org] better. :-)
  • eight-legged autonomous combat vehicles
    It looks like they are going to shell out for some Tachikoma.

  • just one step along the way (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Surt (22457) on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:44PM (#14506952) Homepage Journal
    The rich need the poor to do only a few jobs: mass manufacture, police and emergency services, civil services. When they've got robots that eliminate the need for those at the bottom, I doubt they'll keep them around. If you are middle class or lower, you should think carefully about whether you're helping to build technology that will allow the upper class to do away with you.

  • The Cops, The Criminals & The Civil Fruitcakes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by creimer (824291) on Wednesday January 18 2006, @11:50PM (#14506971) Homepage
    If the Robo-Cops hits the streets, the invention of small EMP grenades won't be too far behind. As an American citizen, do I have the constitutional right to bear EMP grenades? Or would EMP grenades fall into the same classification as regular explosive grenades?

    • Re:The Cops, The Criminals & The Civil Fruitca (Score:5, Informative)

      by Belseth (835595) on Thursday January 19 2006, @12:48AM (#14507240)
      If the Robo-Cops hits the streets, the invention of small EMP grenades won't be too far behind. As an American citizen, do I have the constitutional right to bear EMP grenades? Or would EMP grenades fall into the same classification as regular explosive grenades?

      Two problems with that senerio. First EMP weapons at last word were still a rumor even for the military. If they do exist they would bulky and probably produce a fair amount of radiation. It isn't that easy to produce a field strong enough to knock out electronics.

      The other issue is if that were a risk it's possible to harden hardware electronics from EMP fields. A lot of military hardware is already. I'd be real surprised if it was ever possible to produce an EMP gernade. In some ways it's not that different than trying to make a nuclear hand gernade. They may have had them in Starship Troopers but they don't exist in the real world and there's no way to make one with current understanding of physics. Even the brief case bombs were never proven and those are considerably larger than a handgernade. I tend to believe they are possible from what I've read and seen but I'm not 100% convinced one has been made.

      There's far easier ways to take out a robot than an EMP bomb. Part of the draw back to most battle robots are they aren't really that tough. You'll notice most have stuck with a wheeled or tank tread approach. Wheels and tank treads are tougher and more efficent than walking machines. A two or four legged robot would have the same frailties as well as advantages of an animal with the same number of legs. The biggest problem always is trying to make motors small enough and strong enough to make walking possible. Equalling a human for strength, speed and endurance is far harder than it looks and it's a very long way to the bionic man.

      • The other issue is if that were a risk it's possible to harden hardware electronics from EMP fields. A lot of military hardware is already.

        Someone I know was shown around an Antonov transport plane, and initially thought "Stupid Russians, they've got huge areas taken up with valves instead of a little box full of semiconductor components". Then he thought about EMP from a nuclear explosion and how those valves would barely notice it, and it's a lot cheaper than mucking about with short production runs of s

  • I am a robotics researcher. We focus on completely autonomous systems. Realistically, there are some significant technical problems with just a web-controlled robot. Where will South Korea get the high-bandwidth wireless infrastructure? The robots will only work within range of the towers, and what if the towers are taken out?

    Like it says in the article, they will probably just be remotely-operated robots (most of the time). If anyone had a fully autonomous machine ready for combat, then why the DARPA gra

  • Does that mean they plan to have their robot army ready by 2001, the decade that includes 2010?

    Or are they using the incorrect method of delineating decades? In which case, it means they will have their robot army ready by 2011.

  • Can the S.Koreans really build something like this? It seemed Japan was far more advanced in Robotics.
  • Robot soldiers? This must be to counter what North Korea has [theonion.com].

  • Why is it the Koreans? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by putko (753330) on Thursday January 19 2006, @12:00AM (#14507042) Homepage Journal
    It seems there are a few patterns here:

    Japanese make friendly servant robots (to help old people).
    Koreans make battle/guard robots. With weapons. So humans don't have to fight.
    Americans make rescue robots, unmanned aerial vehicles.

    Doesn't this seem a bit odd? Why don't US companies try to make a friendly robot like the Japanese? Why are we so big on search and rescue? Why do the Koreans pour their precious money into killer bots?

    Why don't the Koreans make agricultural robots, so that humans don't have to toil in the fields? If we had those in the USA, we'd have a totally automated farming workforce. And where do the Europeans fit in here? What sort of robots do they want?

  • Obligatory reference #1 (Score:4, Funny)

    by mezzaninemkii (947108) on Thursday January 19 2006, @12:26AM (#14507144)
    police drone rush kekekekekeke ^_____________^

  • A whole 34 million USD? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Alea (122080) on Thursday January 19 2006, @12:38AM (#14507194)
    Through 2011? Well, that should about cover the coffee budget...

    Even if clever scientists and engineers are really cheap in South Korea, I have trouble believing this kind of budget is going to produce more than a particularly hostile Roomba.

    Arghhhhh... It's sucking at my toes!

    Hmmm... now that I think of it... there's definitely a market for that sort of robot.

  • To hell with security, where's the pr0nBots? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Chuqmystr (126045) on Thursday January 19 2006, @01:25AM (#14507412) Homepage
    Yeah, that's right. I want a little cutie like that one in that goddamned robot chik-flick flick my wife made me watch with the little robot kid,er, AI or Erore does pooh-bear or fried green tomatoes or whatever the hell. I want one with multiple meat ports I can interface. And that's not all, damnit! I want an SLA that states I can send her dirty little rump to the crusher with my choice of "transference" of the best moments and get a tight, nubile and fresh little replacement. It's the least bit all these goddamned machines owe me after so many years of catering to their pithy needs. A gourmet meal, some fine drinks, and never hear "I'm tired, I have headache" after a long one at the data center making certain all that pr0n gets to where it has to go is all I ask for whatever ridiculous third mortgage I'll need to take out to get it. This is America damnit! Where's my screw-bot?!? 'Nuff said.

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.