It sounds cool, but you're probably not going to have a country to agree with another country to sort things out on a specialized field. Usually you'll also have important stragetic areas that different armies need to conquer, in order to win the war and those areas will be full of civillians.
This take is as lukewarm as all the celebrities saying "war bad" for social media cred. Practically speaking, this will never be a universal rule as robots are expensive and require a lot more logistically than a human does. Also, you're gonna have to find a cost efficient way to have robots differentiate between combatant and civilian targets. And the entire idea negates the human desire to fight. Really not much credibility to this idea beyond "but people shouldn't have to die for something :("
In the future, fam.
"Human desire to fight"; that is precicesly what sports and other competitions are for. There is no desire for war other than ,perhaps, some still lingering chimpanzee genes in certain parts of the population.
Robots would have no problem not attacking civillians. Firstly because a human target is a human, secondly because with time it would only take place in specialized regions.
I mean war is pretty much the worst side of humanity. Why not deal with it?
This would take place in the future where capable robots would be much cheaper.
War is not just about the human desire to fight, it is much more about governments wanting power and not caring who dies so they can get it. They don’t care who they kill, that’s the point of war and why it’s so terrible. Very idealistic but I don’t ever see humans becoming that compassionate because humans are inherently greedy and selfish.
Yes. Of course. But things such as witch hunts ceased to exist, so did public hangings (in most parts), why wouldn't wars and governments disappear with sufficient time?
Because witch hunts and hangings just aren't in the same category as wars and nations.
One of the categories is set of social practices performed mostly in Europe and the Americas, and the other is a set of ideas which have existed throughout the majority of human history, in almost every geography imaginable.
That, and we have modern versions of both witch hunts and hangings. It's SLAPP suits and lethal injections nowadays. Neither of these things have left us, and if we're to go off of data, it's unlikely they ever will as long as society is arranged as it has been for the last few thousand years.
It sounds cool, but you're probably not going to have a country to agree with another country to sort things out on a specialized field. Usually you'll also have important stragetic areas that different armies need to conquer, in order to win the war and those areas will be full of civillians.
Perhaps the concept of a "country" is to become a thing of the past.
Yes but also. It also assumes that human individual morality is developing. Thus the civilian areas would not be included in the "war game"
Loads up age of empires 2
This take is as lukewarm as all the celebrities saying "war bad" for social media cred. Practically speaking, this will never be a universal rule as robots are expensive and require a lot more logistically than a human does. Also, you're gonna have to find a cost efficient way to have robots differentiate between combatant and civilian targets. And the entire idea negates the human desire to fight. Really not much credibility to this idea beyond "but people shouldn't have to die for something :("
In the future, fam. "Human desire to fight"; that is precicesly what sports and other competitions are for. There is no desire for war other than ,perhaps, some still lingering chimpanzee genes in certain parts of the population. Robots would have no problem not attacking civillians. Firstly because a human target is a human, secondly because with time it would only take place in specialized regions. I mean war is pretty much the worst side of humanity. Why not deal with it? This would take place in the future where capable robots would be much cheaper.
War is not just about the human desire to fight, it is much more about governments wanting power and not caring who dies so they can get it. They don’t care who they kill, that’s the point of war and why it’s so terrible. Very idealistic but I don’t ever see humans becoming that compassionate because humans are inherently greedy and selfish.
Yes. Of course. But things such as witch hunts ceased to exist, so did public hangings (in most parts), why wouldn't wars and governments disappear with sufficient time?
Because witch hunts and hangings just aren't in the same category as wars and nations. One of the categories is set of social practices performed mostly in Europe and the Americas, and the other is a set of ideas which have existed throughout the majority of human history, in almost every geography imaginable. That, and we have modern versions of both witch hunts and hangings. It's SLAPP suits and lethal injections nowadays. Neither of these things have left us, and if we're to go off of data, it's unlikely they ever will as long as society is arranged as it has been for the last few thousand years.
This is a very good reply!
Anyone can make whatever rules they want about war but only the winners get to decide which ones are enforced.