Paging LBB8 Robots for TL=8+ disruption ...

[Grav_Moped]

The reason Zhodani prefer to use combat robots is that they know from personal experience what getting killed feels like (telepathically, by proxy).

Destroyed robots don't give you flashbacks of having died in pain....repeatedly.

 

[aramis]

I meant to say many militaries would not authorize fully autonomous weapon systems.

Most first world already have some. They're called Cruise Missiles, and CIWS. CIWS, once turned on, is fully auto. Any target inside the engagement parameters eats lead until it no longer meets engagement
Cruise Missiles have been full self guided for decades now. Fire and pray. Some have remote kill switches; others supposedly do not.

It's just a matter of how far back the chain will they go...

I don't think anyone will hesitate once it becomes practical... largely because you cannot win a war of attrition on the scale it can be generated. (I'm skirting the politics line carfully - go past, and you will get infracted... keep it in the abstract).

The only adequate response to robo-infantry is either more production of robo-infantry or strategic strikes on the means of producing them. Human infantry cannot compete on reaction times, only on craftiness. Humans cannot compete on supply needs, either. Nor on reproduction rates.

 

[Rupert]

Humans cannot compete on supply needs, either.

That depends on what the maintenance and power requirements of the robots are like.

 

[mike wightman]

Not really.
The troops responsible for "herding bots" would be the NCOs, which means Proles (the great untrained masses of people whose psionics are left to rot). At best, the Zhodani robots might have telekinetically controllable on/off "kill switches" to shut them down, but that's about it.

Read the setting material, the robots can be controlled with psionics.

Dunno about the "paranoia" factor vis-a-vis the Hivers (I'm not well versed in the politics/cultures involved), but I can easily envision K'Kree form factor robots creating their own form of "uncanny valley" for the herd minded K'Kree. The closest analogy I can call to mind easily would be ... Holodeck Addiction as depicted in Star Trek.

Again, the setting canon has K'kree using robots for vehicles and fighters because they are unable to cram themselves into small spaces.

 

[mike wightman]

As for Hivers, their computers ans robots might be good, but they aren't that good. If they were they'd not need to put up with the Ithklur, their quirks, and their violence.

Canon says otherwise:

"Hiver robot brains are always TL 16."

"Warbots
Hivers do not like close combat, and their excellent warbots have relieved them from this unpleasant duty. Some Hiver armies have consisted entirely of warbots, with no living members. Hiver warbots are of such quality that their import into the lmperium Is illegal."

 

[Rupert]

Canon says otherwise:

"Hiver robot brains are always TL 16."

"Warbots
Hivers do not like close combat, and their excellent warbots have relieved them from this unpleasant duty. Some Hiver armies have consisted entirely of warbots, with no living members. Hiver warbots are of such quality that their import into the lmperium Is illegal."

No mention of robots in AM7. Aliens of the Rim mentions robotics as a skill and that Hivers export robots (though how much of a market for them there is in the New Era is a question), but no mention of the use of warbots. GT Alien Races 3 mentions that they have many robots and that they're good, but not that they're any sort of self-aware or allowed to roam battlefields independently. I don't have any MgT material on the Hivers, so maybe it's retconned this.

So we come to Book 8, published the same year as AM7. Given the respective authors, I'd take AM7 over Book 8. Also, while the text of Robots claims a certain level of AI for TL16, they are still limited to 'High Autonomous'. The primary advantage TL16 has is that high-end brains end up much smaller (because synaptic units are much smaller than parallel ones). MgT2's Robot Handbook states that Hivers are comfortable having robots fight for them, but makes no mention of them using armies made solely of robots, and it also has their robots as TL15 and not of exceptional Int. In fact, I'd say the Hiver bots' brains are a bit too ordinary.

So, one source says some stuff (not including your claim that Hiver robots are self-aware) that no other source mentions, even when they should logically do so.

 

[whartung]

CIWS, once turned on, is fully auto.

To be pedantic, the CIWS CAN be used that way, I don't know of any events where they have just "turned it on", outside, of course, for testing.

Normally, it'll light something up, lock on, inform the operators, and they then hit the "KILL IT" button, keeping a man in the loop.

I don't know of any real world combat incidents where they've let the system have free rein.

And to contrast cruise missiles, the CM does not select the target, it simply navigates to it. And, to be clear, CMs are routed by mission planners, and then navigate that route themselves. Planners tell them how to get there, CMs manage the "over the hills, through the dales" part of it.

 

[Enoki]

To be fair ... "It's hard to make predictions, especially about the future."

But I'm becoming increasingly convinced that humanoid robotics is going to be one of the key advances between the TL=7- and the TL=8+ segments of the tech level coding in UWPs. Being able to 3D PRINT LABOR (who don't need human life support!) at MASS SCALE (multi-millions to billions) that are generalized enough to perform most generalized tasks ... basically "breaks" the dependence on sophonts to Get Stuff Done.



Where this makes a difference in Traveller is the notion that pretty much ANY (intentional) colonization effort (by humaniti), whether interplanetary or interstellar, is going to be remarkably dependent upon robotic technologies (both generalized and specialized) to achieve AT SCALE.

What this means in practice is that the UWP code for Population may not in fact be the kind of Be All/End All factor that we have often assumed it ought to be (Population: 6- means Non-industrial trade code, etc.). What could happen is that "sufficiently high tech but low population" mainworlds COULD (potentially) be making up for their "missing manpower" with ... robots ... which would put a rather different spin on a variety of otherwise "frontier" worlds that are still attempting to bootstrap themselves up to Population: 7+ (assuming their population is growing).



Another question to consider would be something relevant to Zhodani culture, in which psionics are pervasive, encouraged and used on a daily basis.

For the psionically mute/atrophied, the fact that robots "have no one home" in the psionic sense could be potentially ... unsettling ... in various contexts.

For Solomani/Vilani cultures, this isn't a big deal ... since most people do not train in psionics (nor want to).
But for the Zhodani culture, this would basically relegate non-psionic robots to the status of being Proles in Zhodani society.

Add robots to that list that "do not receive training" because they are incapable of psionics themselves (until TL=25-27), although the humble Psionic Switch is a TL=9 bit of kit that is commonly in use (since the switch itself isn't psionic, but requires telekinesis to make use of).

This would (culturally) explain why robots are so readily used for agriculture and war, as labor/personnel saving devices ... but are not necessarily prevalent "in all walks of life" (think personal companion/assistant) like robots could potentially be in Vilani and Solomani cultures, due to the key differences in cultural attitudes that result from living in a psionically aware way of life.

This would happen only if the robot did whatever better and cheaper than a human could. Not just better or cheaper, but both. For much of human history, slaves were a better choice for getting things done than domesticated animals like a horse. Horses remained in specialized niches because of lack of a means to make them general do stuff better and cheaper than a human could.

Same thing here. Until the robot can outperform a human at something AND do it cheaper, they will remain a novelty.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Until the robot can outperform a human at something AND do it cheaper, they will remain a novelty.

For generalized robot applications, "outperform a human at something" will often times be dependent upon the bottleneck of the HAND (dexterity and sensitivity).

For "do it cheaper" ... that's where mass production/volume scaling comes in to make a difference. When you can copy the software that controls 3D behaviors into multiple robots, you start looking at hardware/software application types of scaling ... rather than training each robot in a "one off/bespoke" fashion (or even collectively like a classroom of sophonts). Mass production of the hardware bringing down the cost for each robot is what will make gaming this out (in advance of it actually happening) wildly divergent in terms of potential outcomes.

However, you are definitely correct in one crucially important respect.
In order for a disruptive technology to be WIDELY adopted, it must be both better AND cheaper than what preceded it (that's an AND, not an OR).

Printing technology superseded handwritten scriveners because it was both better AND cheaper.
Automobiles superseded beasts of burden because they became both better AND cheaper.
Desktop computing superseded mainframe computing because it became both better AND cheaper (in multiple fields of business).
... and so on and so forth ...
And don't even get me started on the advancements in aeronautics and firearms in the past 150 (or so) years.

 

[kilemall]

This would happen only if the robot did whatever better and cheaper than a human could. Not just better or cheaper, but both. For much of human history, slaves were a better choice for getting things done than domesticated animals like a horse. Horses remained in specialized niches because of lack of a means to make them general do stuff better and cheaper than a human could.

Same thing here. Until the robot can outperform a human at something AND do it cheaper, they will remain a novelty.

I liked the LBB8 mechanic of the robot lifespan. Early models only last 10 years, so Cr200000 costs Cr20000 per year. Lifespans increase so sinking the big initial purchase pays off for decades.

Or I suppose we could have robot aging tables.

 

[BwapTED]

Unleash Virus on the droid army.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Things that make you go ...