Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Page / 5
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 1:24:32 AM EDT
[#1]
lol

I've worked on swarming and cooperative autonomous flight systems before. Its actually pretty fucking easy to beat humans. When you dont need to deal with human limits or resources supporting a human pilot; it frees up a fuckton of resources that go directly to performance/payload.



Link Posted: 6/28/2016 1:31:57 AM EDT
[#2]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Robots are not affected by high Gs and can react thousand times faster than human.  We dead

If the vehicle is heavy enough to carry meaningful armament, the pilot's not a pronounced G limitation.
There's a lot of weight that can be used for armament when all the life support and human control systems are not there, and the AC is configured from the ground up without a pilot.
Plus, at that point, distributed or swarm system would make more sense anyways.


Not to mention, you talk about carrying meaningful armament, what if the robot/ drone IS the armament?  I.E. kinetic kill vehicles.


If only we could develop such technology. We could call it a missile. Or we could make is go slower at a more maneuverable cruising speed.

If only.

Alas we are stuck with airplanes.

Also, war is more art than science. Just because a computer can beat an ABM at checklist execution doesn't mean shit.
Are we?    

Kill vehicle
+
http://www.onr.navy.mil/Media-Center/Press-Releases/2015/LOCUST-low-cost-UAV-swarm-ONR.aspx
https://youtu.be/W1HCFM9yoKo

 


hah

Well now...

That looks familiar.

Link Posted: 6/28/2016 1:38:20 AM EDT
[#3]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

If the vehicle is heavy enough to carry meaningful armament, the pilot's not a pronounced G limitation.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Robots are not affected by high Gs and can react thousand times faster than human.  We dead

If the vehicle is heavy enough to carry meaningful armament, the pilot's not a pronounced G limitation.




Yeah, okay.

Link Posted: 6/28/2016 1:54:47 AM EDT
[#4]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


as i understand it, the control laws of an airplane are a trivially simple task.  as in, a cell from an earthworm can be 'programmed' to keep an airplane in controlled flight.  the challenge is structured tactics.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
When it flys an actual aircraft, call me,


as i understand it, the control laws of an airplane are a trivially simple task.  as in, a cell from an earthworm can be 'programmed' to keep an airplane in controlled flight.  the challenge is structured tactics.


I wouldn't say trivially simple. With the right sensor inputs, it's easier.

Over a decade ago my team had one of the 1st fully autonomous, auto trimming/stabilizing (including retrimming in flight to suit environ feedback and have a completely different flight profile as well), take offs, landings, in flight maneuvers, etc systems for the DARPA project for creating micro/mini UAVs. Actually, we developed about 3/4ths of the all the 1st gen vehicles... As long as you have the proper sensor feedback and nav/gain filters; its "easy" now. Hell, for 50 bucks you can get you an arduino board setup that can get you basic functionality or 10 bucks will buy you an autotrimming toy quad.

I would say the bigger challenge at the time was miniaturizing and integrating everything into a single unit. After developing miniaturized packaged flight control systems - which btw paved the way for the whole drones/uav bullshit you see now (most integrated IMU/GPS/OFPs in OTS are based on our original design or just updated spins of it)  -  thats where the hard part is. All the mission logic and what to do with all the other sensor information.


With flight controls all but out of the way - it's much easier to focus on swarming or following or always maintaining some type of positional advantage. Neural networks (or any other type of unsupervised style learning network for that matter) arent even needed for something like that. There are much easier, faster, and cheaper (in terms or compute resources) ways of doing it.

Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:01:34 AM EDT
[#5]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
It's really not that hard to believe that computers are smarter than humans . Not much of an accomplishment .
View Quote


They're not smarter, they have no intelligence per se, they are just very good, and very fast at evaluating pre programmed scenarios.

Their advantage lies in raw speed of decision-making
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:02:20 AM EDT
[#6]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Kill all humans.... kill all humans...
View Quote


This is how Skynet starts...because this is how you get Skynet.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:02:46 AM EDT
[#7]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
lol

I've worked on swarming and cooperative autonomous flight systems before. Its actually pretty fucking easy to beat humans. When you dont need to deal with human limits or resources supporting a human pilot; it frees up a fuckton of resources that go directly to performance/payload.



View Quote

When you say "a fuckton" how many pounds are we talking about.  Ok, maybe not pounds, but as a percentage of air vehicle weight?
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:06:51 AM EDT
[#8]
Did anyone say skynet yet?

3 pages in gd im sure ots on the first page.

If not im taking a month off of arf
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:07:49 AM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Did anyone say skynet yet?

3 pages in gd im sure ots on the first page.

If not im taking a month off of arf
View Quote

No arfcation for you.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:09:34 AM EDT
[#10]
The Chinese will hack this.  Within six months, DealExtreme will be selling pirated games with the technology.  
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:28:10 AM EDT
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

When you say "a fuckton" how many pounds are we talking about.  Ok, maybe not pounds, but as a percentage of air vehicle weight?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
lol

I've worked on swarming and cooperative autonomous flight systems before. Its actually pretty fucking easy to beat humans. When you dont need to deal with human limits or resources supporting a human pilot; it frees up a fuckton of resources that go directly to performance/payload.




When you say "a fuckton" how many pounds are we talking about.  Ok, maybe not pounds, but as a percentage of air vehicle weight?


When your whole argument is based on "If the vehicle is heavy enough to carry meaningful armament,"  yet it takes a trivial amount of payload to get a M/F/K - Kill on a flight asset; the whole thing is moot. 5 pounds of comp-b behind a shaped charge liner, in a frag case is all you need. Heck, doesnt even take that much.  

However, to address your Q. Unmanned systems are designed from the ground up very differently. Many designs are completely different unmanned. The airframe itself isnt a trade off to support the literally thousands of components that go into the man/machine interface. It's more than just ripping out life support. Aircraft are designed around the man/machine. When that interface itself is gone - many things disappear. It's hard to make an apples/apples, because the airframes themselves are very dissimilar.

Just to rattle off a small list of things: anything in the cockpit, the cockpit itself, life support, any terminals/interfaces, wiring for terminals, hydraulics/linkages for pilot control, etc etc. When you're not even designing for a cockpit or habbitable/survivable section in the 1st place, the overall design becomes much more compact and very different from the get go. Kinda a crap comparison, as the following two weren't design for all out performance (and they arent fully auto)... but it does give you an idea of the weight differences of similarly sized stuff. MQ1 and 9 are small fractions of the weight of similarly sized aircraft.  MQ1 weighs nothing... but can carry AIM-92s.  The MQ1 wont outmaneuver you, but the AIM92 sure as shit will. A dozen MQ1s, working together... Have fun.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:37:30 AM EDT
[#12]
All this virtual reality shit is opening a port hole to hell.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:40:23 AM EDT
[#13]
Ok, but for a supersonic aircraft like a fighter, what percentage of the air vehicle weight is devoted to supporting a human crew and the interface for the crew?
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:43:12 AM EDT
[#14]
They probably just ported the enemy AI from Ace Combat.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:44:18 AM EDT
[#15]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Ok, but for a supersonic aircraft like a fighter, what percentage of the air vehicle weight is devoted to supporting a human crew and the interface for the crew?
View Quote


All of the instruments, cockpit pressurization, ECS far larger than avionics alone would require, ejection seat and rails, lost volume for all of those things.  I've always said we should take our boneyarded F-16s and yank all that bullshit out, replace the canopy with a radome and put an all aspect antenna array in it, and couple all the control systems.  Not like the QF-16s they are building now, but an airplane meant to fight.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:51:32 AM EDT
[#16]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Ok, but for a supersonic aircraft like a fighter, what percentage of the air vehicle weight is devoted to supporting a human crew and the interface for the crew?
View Quote


It's an invalid question. The entire airframe itself was designed to accommodate crew. So you're talking probably 1/4th to 1/3th of the fuselage alone that wouldnt even exist in an autonomous equivalent, much less a multitude of avionics, safety systems, hardening, etc etc that wouldnt exist either.

It's like asking how much weight do you save by taking the seats out of an SUV. You wouldn't have had an SUV in the 1st place, it would have been an Exige from the get go. You never needed that 2nd or 3rd row of seats (a cockpit in the 1st place) in the big ol 4x4 Expedition - so it wouldnt be designed to be there to begin with.  

Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:53:10 AM EDT
[#17]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



I could tell you what the brakes are, hint it ends badly for anyone in the AI field.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
But you agree we are moving towards that end game? I guess my point is at what point do we say "they're smart enough, we(humans) will take it from here."


Never going to happen.  Not sure where this train ends, but it's going in one direction and there are no brakes.



I could tell you what the brakes are, hint it ends badly for anyone in the AI field.



I'm immensely disappointed in myself for not immediately having thought of that.

Link Posted: 6/28/2016 3:10:12 AM EDT
[#18]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


It's an invalid question. The entire airframe itself was designed to accommodate crew. So you're talking probably 1/4th to 1/3th of the fuselage alone that wouldnt even exist in an autonomous equivalent, much less a multitude of avionics, safety systems, hardening, etc etc that wouldnt exist either.

It's like asking how much weight do you save by taking the seats out of an SUV. You wouldn't have had an SUV in the 1st place, it would have been an Exige from the get go. You never needed that 2nd or 3rd row of seats (a cockpit in the 1st place) in the big ol 4x4 Expedition - so it wouldnt be designed to be there to begin with.  

View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok, but for a supersonic aircraft like a fighter, what percentage of the air vehicle weight is devoted to supporting a human crew and the interface for the crew?


It's an invalid question. The entire airframe itself was designed to accommodate crew. So you're talking probably 1/4th to 1/3th of the fuselage alone that wouldnt even exist in an autonomous equivalent, much less a multitude of avionics, safety systems, hardening, etc etc that wouldnt exist either.

It's like asking how much weight do you save by taking the seats out of an SUV. You wouldn't have had an SUV in the 1st place, it would have been an Exige from the get go. You never needed that 2nd or 3rd row of seats (a cockpit in the 1st place) in the big ol 4x4 Expedition - so it wouldnt be designed to be there to begin with.  


It's not a loaded question.  Engineers who build fighter aircraft address it all the time.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 3:24:49 AM EDT
[#19]
The fact that it can run on a basic computer tells me that it's unlikely simulating sensor systems, fields of view, line of sight, radar systems,jamming .etc



It probably reacts as soon as he pushes the missile button or any other input for that matter before it could realistically observe and interpret those actions.
Can it interpret a video stream from independent computer system and still defeat an opponent?






 
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 3:33:05 AM EDT
[#20]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
When people keep assuring me that Terminator will never become a reality:
View Quote


As fast as AI and robotics are advancing, it might be much sooner than we think. At least for the robot part of cyborg.  The realistic living tissue (over the robot) might take a lot longer.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 3:36:25 AM EDT
[#21]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

It's not a loaded question.  Engineers who build fighter aircraft address it all the time.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok, but for a supersonic aircraft like a fighter, what percentage of the air vehicle weight is devoted to supporting a human crew and the interface for the crew?


It's an invalid question. The entire airframe itself was designed to accommodate crew. So you're talking probably 1/4th to 1/3th of the fuselage alone that wouldnt even exist in an autonomous equivalent, much less a multitude of avionics, safety systems, hardening, etc etc that wouldnt exist either.

It's like asking how much weight do you save by taking the seats out of an SUV. You wouldn't have had an SUV in the 1st place, it would have been an Exige from the get go. You never needed that 2nd or 3rd row of seats (a cockpit in the 1st place) in the big ol 4x4 Expedition - so it wouldnt be designed to be there to begin with.  


It's not a loaded question.  Engineers who build fighter aircraft address it all the time.


I didn't say it was a loaded question, simply an invalid question. The fuselages will be different from the get go. Probably the closest you're gonna get to a comparison for what you are trying to get at would be a mq9/a10 sans the gau.



Link Posted: 6/28/2016 3:39:03 AM EDT
[#22]
Terminator future? It won't happen in our lifetime. A human still has to be around to "turn it off and turn it back on when it locks up". If you look at all the videos of robot research, the elephant in the room is a battery that can last more than a short while. A small robotic fighter will not be able to "feed" itself.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 4:47:26 AM EDT
[#23]
Is there one easy universal question it can ask to determine if you're a one world commie liberal, and then attack? Something subtle so that their feels will more than likely overcome their discretion, like:"Do you belive that fur is murder?"








Cause I could really get behind that.





 





As far as power sources, nuclear power plants could probably be made much smaller and lighter, when you don't have to put human grade shielding into the design. Skynet can afford to scrap irradiated robots that have done their job, say leveling Rhode Island, if it's necessary.


 
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 6:07:13 AM EDT
[#24]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
FIFY.  Humans are still developing the code, and hence still are smarter.  I'm not aware of any AI that can yet create itself.  Yes, it can learn an be adaptive to the environment, but until we have AI developing their own AI, I'm not too worried.   The big edge right now is that computers and AI can process data much faster than our brains, and thus can make decisions more quickly based on an available data set.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:

It's really not that hard to believe that computers are smarter can process data faster than humans . Not much of an accomplishment .




FIFY.  Humans are still developing the code, and hence still are smarter.  I'm not aware of any AI that can yet create itself.  Yes, it can learn an be adaptive to the environment, but until we have AI developing their own AI, I'm not too worried.   The big edge right now is that computers and AI can process data much faster than our brains, and thus can make decisions more quickly based on an available data set.
Im betting the game was rigged for the AI.  Its not sensing your making a left turn but is getting data from the human pilots control interface . The same way an AI game opponent knows where you are the whole time.  In the actual air there would be some delay as the radar on the drone recieves the signal and then processes the information.  Im sure these guys need to secure funding and want to show promise.  Put them in the air head to head and not on a simulation and I will be impressed.   As soon as you can scramble the brain on the AI fighter or figure out how to mislead it just as stealth was defeated your back to needing human control.  
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 7:03:52 AM EDT
[#25]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
As far as power sources, nuclear power plants could probably be made much smaller and lighter, when you don't have to put human grade shielding into the design. Skynet can afford to scrap irradiated robots that have done their job, say leveling Rhode Island, if it's necessary.
 
View Quote

Weight savings isn't much of a metric in nuclear power plant design, and the shielding requirements for robotic instead of human staffing would do very little to reduce plant construction and operating costs.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 8:47:38 AM EDT
[#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Humans are still developing the code, and hence still are smarter.  I'm not aware of any AI that can yet create itself.  Yes, it can learn an be adaptive to the environment, but until we have AI developing their own AI, I'm not too worried.
View Quote

Have we got a vacation for you.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 8:48:41 AM EDT
[#27]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
otters, sparrows, chimps, and bonobos all use tools.



should i worry?
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:



Quoted:


Quoted:

I could tell you what the brakes are, hint it ends badly for anyone in the AI field.




That only delays it.  From the moment we started using tools as a species there was no stopping it.






otters, sparrows, chimps, and bonobos all use tools.



should i worry?




 
I don't know, bonobos are sneaky little fuckers.






Link Posted: 6/28/2016 9:01:18 AM EDT
[#28]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


They're not there yet, at least as far as I know as a civilian that's not in that industry, but I suspect it won't be that many years when a manned aircraft is either dead from a laser or outflown by semi autonomous drones.     I wouldn't be surprised if you had a small number of manned planes flying w/ lots of drones w/ the option to hand them off to remote controllers farther away if necessary.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
When it flys an actual aircraft, call me,

Sounds like Lee couldnt beat a game console. A computer beat a chess master. But didnt manipulate an actusl chess board.

Were atmospheric and weather conditions a variable?

How about 10 hajis with MANPADS?

Some day. But not this day.


They're not there yet, at least as far as I know as a civilian that's not in that industry, but I suspect it won't be that many years when a manned aircraft is either dead from a laser or outflown by semi autonomous drones.     I wouldn't be surprised if you had a small number of manned planes flying w/ lots of drones w/ the option to hand them off to remote controllers farther away if necessary.

You accidently described part of the F35 capabilities.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 9:03:54 AM EDT
[#29]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


It's unstoppable.

Short of a total collapse of human civilization.   I'll be interested to see if it is actually conscious or just incredibly intelligent.   One fallacy that a lot of people forget is you don't actually have to achieve a "ghost in the machine" to achieve A.I.   There's absolutely no reason to believe that it has to have anything like our "egos", or sense of "I".  

I suppose the good news is it won't have an endocrine system.  It'll have no sex drive, no need for status, or material gratification that evolution has programed us for.  It will be nothing like us.  

....and that is good.  



 
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Actually it is easily detected. Check out the news and every fag with a laptop trying to make an AI is blogging about it or letting some reporter video the tests. Someone eliminates or co-opts the ones in college and tracks the ones who graduated and you will have YOUR LIST.


AI/super computer processing ability is just like the arms race of previous generations.  If you decide to try and slow it down that's all well and good, but your opponents will most likely not join your quest.


It's unstoppable.

Short of a total collapse of human civilization.   I'll be interested to see if it is actually conscious or just incredibly intelligent.   One fallacy that a lot of people forget is you don't actually have to achieve a "ghost in the machine" to achieve A.I.   There's absolutely no reason to believe that it has to have anything like our "egos", or sense of "I".  

I suppose the good news is it won't have an endocrine system.  It'll have no sex drive, no need for status, or material gratification that evolution has programed us for.  It will be nothing like us.  

....and that is good.  



 

The SOLOMON net?
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 9:14:29 AM EDT
[#30]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Did anyone say skynet yet?

3 pages in gd im sure ots on the first page.

If not im taking a month off of arf
View Quote

You will be even happier to know that the GFT code that is "coaching" the ALPHA AI code is appropriately named ... EVE.  And since it's continually optimizing control parameters on the fly, these genetically successive codes will have all sorts of crazy filename extensions inherited from the parent codes - do this enough, and there could be all sorts of wonderfully foreboding and apocalyptic filenames...

[For those who haven't worked with GA's, here's an entertaining example]
Genetic Algorithm Example
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 9:14:57 AM EDT
[#31]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Iridium Next

100% global coverage broadband.  The first satellites are to be launched next month by SpaceX.



View Quote


Didn't they do tht already? Late 90's dsat phones of the smae name? Huge commercial failure as I recall. I think they wound up shutting don the sats after they went BK. May have sold a few off, even de-orbited some I think.

I would never reuse that name especially for a space based corp.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 9:43:25 AM EDT
[#32]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

You will be even happier to know that the GFT code that is "coaching" the ALPHA AI code is appropriately named ... EVE.  And since it's continually optimizing control parameters on the fly, these genetically successive codes will have all sorts of crazy filename extensions inherited from the parent codes - do this enough, and there could be all sorts of wonderfully foreboding and apocalyptic filenames...

[For those who haven't worked with GA's, here's an entertaining example]
Genetic Algorithm Example
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Did anyone say skynet yet?

3 pages in gd im sure ots on the first page.

If not im taking a month off of arf

You will be even happier to know that the GFT code that is "coaching" the ALPHA AI code is appropriately named ... EVE.  And since it's continually optimizing control parameters on the fly, these genetically successive codes will have all sorts of crazy filename extensions inherited from the parent codes - do this enough, and there could be all sorts of wonderfully foreboding and apocalyptic filenames...

[For those who haven't worked with GA's, here's an entertaining example]
Genetic Algorithm Example


Thank you for this.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 10:41:00 AM EDT
[#33]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Thank you for this.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
[For those who haven't worked with GA's, here's an entertaining example]
Genetic Algorithm Example


Thank you for this.

As of 300 generations, Quiede Zinawe is leading the pack with a score of 315.48, but still falling short of his ancestor, Jinomu Bagiqe, who scored 528.34 in Generation 138.

Quiede, get it together, man!
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 11:16:57 AM EDT
[#34]
How long before they retrofit a fighter and have it go toe to toe with a human pilot?
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 11:31:27 AM EDT
[#35]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Didn't they do tht already? Late 90's dsat phones of the smae name? Huge commercial failure as I recall. I think they wound up shutting don the sats after they went BK. May have sold a few off, even de-orbited some I think.

I would never reuse that name especially for a space based corp.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Iridium Next

100% global coverage broadband.  The first satellites are to be launched next month by SpaceX.





Didn't they do tht already? Late 90's dsat phones of the smae name? Huge commercial failure as I recall. I think they wound up shutting don the sats after they went BK. May have sold a few off, even de-orbited some I think.

I would never reuse that name especially for a space based corp.



The first Iridium network has been in operation since the 90's.   You can buy all kinds of services from them for voice and data.  But it's limited, and expensive.  Iridium Next, is the next generation of satellites, that will have much greater capacity.  
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 11:35:47 AM EDT
[#36]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


When it flys an actual aircraft, call me,



Sounds like Lee couldnt beat a game console. A computer beat a chess master. But didnt manipulate an actusl chess board.



Were atmospheric and weather conditions a variable?



How about 10 hajis with MANPADS?



Some day. But not this day.
View Quote




 
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 11:37:51 AM EDT
[#37]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Robots are not affected by high Gs and can react thousand times faster than human.  We dead
View Quote



But the AI airplanes are (I assume) G-limited the same way the F-16 is G-limited.

 
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 11:38:27 AM EDT
[#38]
Quoted:
link


Artificial intelligence (AI) developed by a University of Cincinnati doctoral graduate was recently assessed by subject-matter expert and retired United States Air Force Colonel Gene Lee — who holds extensive aerial combat experience as an instructor and Air Battle Manager with considerable fighter aircraft expertise — in a high-fidelity air combat simulator. The artificial intelligence, dubbed ALPHA, was the victor in that simulated scenario, and according to Lee, is “the most aggressive, responsive, dynamic and credible AI I’ve seen to date.”

...
It was only after early iterations of ALPHA bested other computer program opponents that Lee then took to manual controls against a more mature version of ALPHA last October. Not only was Lee not able to score a kill against ALPHA after repeated attempts, he was shot out of the air every time during protracted engagements in the simulator.

Since that first human vs. ALPHA encounter in the simulator, this AI has repeatedly bested other experts as well, and is even able to win out against these human experts when its [the ALPHA-controlled] aircraft are deliberately handicapped in terms of speed, turning, missile capability and sensors.
...
Lee, who has been flying in simulators against AI opponents since the early 1980s, said of that first encounter against ALPHA, “I was surprised at how aware and reactive it was. It seemed to be aware of my intentions and reacting instantly to my changes in flight and my missile deployment. It knew how to defeat the shot I was taking. It moved instantly between defensive and offensive actions as needed.”

He added that with most AIs, “an experienced pilot can beat up on it (the AI) if you know what you’re doing. Sure, you might have gotten shot down once in a while by an AI program when you, as a pilot, were trying something new, but, until now, an AI opponent simply could not keep up with anything like the real pressure and pace of combat-like scenarios.”
...
The AI is so fast that it could consider and coordinate the best tactical plan and precise responses, within a dynamic environment, over 250 times faster than ALPHA’s human opponents could blink. UC’s Cohen added, “ALPHA would be an extremely easy AI to cooperate with and have as a teammate. ALPHA could continuously determine the optimal ways to perform tasks commanded by its manned wingman, as well as provide tactical and situational advice to the rest of its flight.”

However, ALPHA and its algorithms require no more than the computing power available in a low-budget PC in order to run in real time and quickly react and respond to uncertainty and random events or scenarios.
...
The ALPHA programming is generational. It can be improved from one generation to the next, from one version to the next. In fact, the current version of ALPHA is only that – the current version. Subsequent versions are expected to perform significantly better.

Again, from UC’s Cohen, “In a lot of ways, it’s no different than when air combat began in W.W. I. At first, there were a whole bunch of pilots. Those who survived to the end of the war were the aces. Only in this case, we’re talking about code.”
View Quote
View Quote



[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oFXszIFkiAQ[/youtube]
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 11:44:37 AM EDT
[#39]

Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


I for one welcome our Top Gun overlords.
View Quote
But how good is the AI at playing homoerotic volleyball?



 
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 11:49:29 AM EDT
[#40]
I would love to see some of those simulations the Colonel was involved in.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 11:51:30 AM EDT
[#41]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
How long before they retrofit a fighter and have it go toe to toe with a human pilot?
View Quote

I'm not sure an F or an F/A is the best platform, or at least not as we know them.  When you start to stack requirements like >5000lb carriage, >500nm combat radius, >1.0M, >3g, there is diminishing return for being pilotless.  Push on one side of the design space balloon and the other side bubbles out - only through careful design from all aspect can you uniformly compress the design balloon.  As a sensor test bed, maybe, but in all probability, that stuff would be tested on very un-fighterish civilian passenger aircraft before incorporation into a purpose built vehicle.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 11:54:12 AM EDT
[#42]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


All of the instruments, cockpit pressurization, ECS far larger than avionics alone would require, ejection seat and rails, lost volume for all of those things.  I've always said we should take our boneyarded F-16s and yank all that bullshit out, replace the canopy with a radome and put an all aspect antenna array in it, and couple all the control systems.  Not like the QF-16s they are building now, but an airplane meant to fight.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok, but for a supersonic aircraft like a fighter, what percentage of the air vehicle weight is devoted to supporting a human crew and the interface for the crew?


All of the instruments, cockpit pressurization, ECS far larger than avionics alone would require, ejection seat and rails, lost volume for all of those things.  I've always said we should take our boneyarded F-16s and yank all that bullshit out, replace the canopy with a radome and put an all aspect antenna array in it, and couple all the control systems.  Not like the QF-16s they are building now, but an airplane meant to fight.


That strikes me as an excellent idea.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 12:03:54 PM EDT
[#43]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


But the AI airplanes are (I assume) G-limited the same way the F-16 is G-limited.  
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Robots are not affected by high Gs and can react thousand times faster than human.  We dead


But the AI airplanes are (I assume) G-limited the same way the F-16 is G-limited.  


A human pilot can pull g for a limited time, but doing so stresses the pilot both physically and mentally.  The AI pilot can maintain perfect situational awareness and react instantly to the opponent's actions while in the middle of a 9g turn, and continue doing that for as many 9g turns as the jet will pull before it runs out of gas.  Considering the AI in question defeated the human pilot in a simulator where he/she was not subjected to those forces, the AI could potentially have an even greater advantage in the air.  It also sounds like this AI has done most of its "learning" against other AI opponents.  Once the AI starts flying real jets against real humans, it will "learn" the limitations of meatware and begin to exploit it.

Another consideration is that a human pilot can only look in one direction and focus on a single object at once, while an AI attached to an all-aspect sensor array like the F-35's EODAS sees everything around it.  If an AI pilot can beat a human 1v1, a flight of AI pilots could conceivably slaughter a large number of human pilots.  In fact, these future unmanned aircraft won't fight as individual AIs, but as a single Swarm AI.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 12:05:36 PM EDT
[#44]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Kill all humans.... kill all humans...
View Quote

Hitler was right...
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 12:15:06 PM EDT
[#45]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:

As of 300 generations, Quiede Zinawe is leading the pack with a score of 315.48, but still falling short of his ancestor, Jinomu Bagiqe, who scored 528.34 in Generation 138.

Quiede, get it together, man!
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
[For those who haven't worked with GA's, here's an entertaining example]
Genetic Algorithm Example


Thank you for this.

As of 300 generations, Quiede Zinawe is leading the pack with a score of 315.48, but still falling short of his ancestor, Jinomu Bagiqe, who scored 528.34 in Generation 138.

Quiede, get it together, man!


Local maximum fitness strikes again!! (Or what the corrext term is)
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 12:18:24 PM EDT
[#46]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
When people keep assuring me that Terminator will never become a reality:
View Quote

Link Posted: 6/28/2016 12:36:03 PM EDT
[#47]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:


Local maximum fitness strikes again!! (Or what the corrext term is)
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
[For those who haven't worked with GA's, here's an entertaining example]
Genetic Algorithm Example


Thank you for this.

As of 300 generations, Quiede Zinawe is leading the pack with a score of 315.48, but still falling short of his ancestor, Jinomu Bagiqe, who scored 528.34 in Generation 138.

Quiede, get it together, man!


Local maximum fitness strikes again!! (Or what the corrext term is)


Close enough.

Convergence in a localized maxima/minima is a bitch.
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 1:46:28 PM EDT
[#48]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Quoted:
When it flys an actual aircraft, call me,

Sounds like Lee couldnt beat a game console. A computer beat a chess master. But didnt manipulate an actusl chess board.

Were atmospheric and weather conditions a variable?

How about 10 hajis with MANPADS?

Some day. But not this day.
View Quote


Could be soon
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:03:19 PM EDT
[#49]
ALL YOUR FLIGHT ARE BELONG TO US!!
Link Posted: 6/28/2016 2:11:04 PM EDT
[#50]


No, no, no. There is no Terminator!
Page / 5
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top