New Russian Jet and Tin Hairs

[MA-Caver]

Another fascinating video sent to me by email by a friend. I watched it and wrote back in my reply... "...insert theme from the Terminator movies here..."

As you watch this (most of the maneuvers are computer controlled) look for
that tail-dropping-first spin, called "THE BARF." At least, that's what it
would be called had I been flying that thing during that flat spin, tail
first. This remarkable aircraft and it's pilot (computer) demonstrates what
was thought impossible for a high speed jet fighter. In the SU-30MK, Russian
aviation has surpassed that of the US and it's allies. This truly impressive
fighter can stall from high speed flight to stop in less than a second. It
can fall back on it's tail, without compressor stall, and go into a flat
spin and recover in less than a minute. There is not an aircraft in any
country's inventory that could stand up to it in dog fight. Tricky as this
plane is and so highly maneuverable, the days of individual "dogfights" are
pretty-well over. The current trick is to spot an enemy plane by radar (or
what will ultimately surplant radar) and to shoot it down with rocketry
before it can find the shooter. And the 30MX isn't very stealthy. Still,
it's one hell of an airplane, particularly to a person who learned to fly in
a J-3 Pipe Cub.
http://www.crazyaviation.com/movies/CA_SU-30.wmv

Computer controlled un-manned planes. What does that hold for our future? Oh sure, a lot fewer human casualties to be sure.
I was watching a "Modern Marvels" program on the history channel a couple of days ago ... talking about "tin-hairs" in today's common electronic circuitry boards. How one of them knocked out a communications satillite a few years ago and wiped out pagers and ATM's all across the country. They said that tin-hairs are something that "they" (circuit board manufacturers) haven't figured out how to "fix" that problem. They want to use lead mixed with tin to inhibit tin-hair growth but evironmental concerns scrapped the idea.
Now true, Terminators, Colossus Projects and I-Robot scenarios are unlikely... but are they really? Programmers will say that it'll be impossible for any computer to gain "conciousness" or "self-awareness" and we needn't worry about rouge computers taking over the world and deeming carbon based units unnecessary drains on resources.
Still I look at stuff like this and those ever-increasing smart robots and so on... and I can't help but be umm... concerned. :idunno: Mebbe it's just me.

 

[Empty Hands]

I must find Sarah Connor. You will take me to her.

 

[crushing]

Wow! What a fun jet to watch. Will those be making the Air Show circuits anytime soon?

 

[theletch1]

There have been and still are plans in the works for computer controlled tractor trailers across the US. Virginia Tech even built what they call the "Smart Road" in Blacksburg, Va to test things like this out. Imagine all those 18 wheelers that you pass on the interstate everyday without a human in the drivers seat. I'd be out of a job just like the fighter pilot. At this point I think the biggest worry with the fighter or other, similar technology is a simple malfunction that causes human casualties on accident. With the advent of quantum computers, though, who knows what will happen. Artificial intelligence may not be artificial forever. Wasn't it Asimov who used the primary rule that a robot may not harm a human for his writings?

 

[crushing]

There have been and still are plans in the works for computer controlled tractor trailers across the US. Virginia Tech even built what they call the "Smart Road" in Blacksburg, Va to test things like this out. Imagine all those 18 wheelers that you pass on the interstate everyday without a human in the drivers seat. I'd be out of a job just like the fighter pilot. At this point I think the biggest worry with the fighter or other, similar technology is a simple malfunction that causes human casualties on accident. With the advent of quantum computers, though, who knows what will happen. Artificial intelligence may not be artificial forever. Wasn't it Asimov who used the primary rule that a robot may not harm a human for his writings?

Yes. . .

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.

. . .and more interesting information about the three laws at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Laws_of_Robotics