(no subject)
Dec. 17th, 2009 11:00 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)

I think James Cameron called these things Hunter-Killers.
Still, once your robot blows someone's legs off... sell them robot legs.*

Whee.
God, we are so fucked sometimes.
My only hope is that with the rise of the Chinese as the major world power we'll see at least a little decline in world conflict. They don't seem like a war economy.
*AFAIK these are the products of two separate companies, but you just know that at some point a landmine manufacturer is going to get into prosthetics. Isn't Motorola the world's biggest landmine maker?
no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 12:10 am (UTC)Vertical marketing they call it...
no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 02:51 am (UTC)Nope, not an insidious, self-perpetuating business-model at all. :-P
Seriously, though, they're unrelated so I'll stop with the jokes about "synergies".
They're both clever designs catering to a specific purpose. Part of me really admires the ingenuity it takes to think-up such machines, build and test them. But, despite arguments that one of them is saving lives by removing human occupants, I have some serous moral hangups.
WRT the legs, they're nice but there's a couple of more innovative approaches. One uses implanted nerve-sensors to get signals from now-redundant nerves. Eg: if you lose an arm but the nerve-fibres terminating at your shoulder still work, they can now make use of 'em.
Another possibility I'd like to see explored would use non-implant brain-sensors. As with all the best new tech these days, the "serious" research has chimps doing one or two things and but the "fun" stuff allows humans to play console games. In 20 years' time, your prosthetic legs will be powered by a Sony PS7.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 03:07 am (UTC)Which will save on the legs' battery life as the operator will rarely be using them. :P
Still though, I find this all really interesting. Can't wait to see where we are in five years.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 12:27 am (UTC)No. But being so centralised they can switch to a war economy easier than most. And (the Central Government at least) is pretty dismissive of non-Han Chinese types. And, in business negotiations, their word is about as solid as water until they actually sign on the dotted line. And they like occupying other countries and destroying the local culture.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 02:23 am (UTC)RE China: wah. Also illustrates why someone needs to rein in Google.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 02:31 am (UTC)http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6810546/MS-sufferer-walks-after-stem-cell-treatment.html
I suppose that's true. The issue of the ubiquity of google on diversity is potentially crushing. On the other hand, I'm optimistic.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 01:29 am (UTC)A curious case of wishful thinking, I fear. Tibet?
China is certainly capable of warlike behaviour and I believe a rise in power would encourage further such behaviour. They're not committed to human rights nor averse to risking global condemnation.
I find the idea of China as a rising power unsettling. Not least because of what the US will risk in response.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 02:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 02:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 02:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 03:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 03:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 03:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 03:22 am (UTC)Whereas, I see these as warning signs for a country that's in need of a surge in national pride, up against a wall financially and not particularly afraid of what the rest of the world thinks. I don't want to Godwin myself, but that calls post WW1 Germany to mind.
Don't China still tacitly support North Korea?
Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see China stand tall and show the world how peace can be the way. I just don't see it happening.
Our best chance is a renewed Cold War that defuses much as the previous one did, hopefully with less loss of life along the way.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 03:32 am (UTC)Except national pride is being questioned by a large segment of the populace, being up against the wall has people looking to their own interests rather than beating up brown people overseas, and I think more and more they are realising they give a crap how the world views them. WWI Germany... I think this is a very different case, somehow. I'm not saying I think Obama is the Messiah, but I do think he's easily smart and sane enough to realise that invading mainland China would be a colossal exercise in immediate and humiliating failure. Morale would be shattered, finances would be lower than anyone ever dreamed possible, it proves the US is toothless and decrepit, it throws the gates open to anyone else that wants to take a crack at them, they'd look goddamned stupid... If Bush was President I'd be worried. I can't imagine Obama tying himself in knots to justify war with China. Not unless China invaded them.
Which, actually, if they were gonna make a single suddent and decisive move, would be a good one in order to rewrite the political map.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 03:43 am (UTC)No, the US would not be so foolish. I think even Bush and co. would have failed to push that through.
invading mainland China would be a colossal exercise in immediate and humiliating failure
Very well said :)
I wonder what would happen if China, say, invaded North Korea?
Nope
Date: 2009-12-17 02:14 am (UTC)http://www.motorola.com/mot/doc/0/611_MotDoc.pdf
Re: Nope
Date: 2009-12-17 02:16 am (UTC)Re: Nope
Date: 2009-12-17 02:29 am (UTC)'With the help of a surprising ally, Human Rights Watch, the organization that brought the issue to Motorola's attention, Motorola produced a 50-page handbook to instruct employees on how to keep their products from ending up in the wrong hands through secondary markets'
So.. yeah, it was brought to their attention by Human Rights Watch.
no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 02:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 02:22 am (UTC)But yeah. Ever since I was a teenager I've kinda liked the idea of a superchromed prosthetic arm. Not that it'd actually be any better (and probably a lot less capable) than a regular arm, realistically, but, y'know, coooooool...
no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 02:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-12-17 03:02 am (UTC)