You're right, Ann, we already have drones that are run by remote control. But that's not quite the same thing as a robot out to do a hit. Or an army of robots controlled by thought. The creep value escalates.
I know what you mean, Rob. But so far, this technology only tells robots to make simply body movements that the "sender" thinks about. I suppose it could eventually be extended to firing a gun or some other wartime function. OTOH, we're already doing remote bombing without thought control.
TJ, that's a good point. OTOH, the robot only recognizes, and responds to, specific thoughts it's been programmed for. So if it gets thoughts it doesn't understand, nothing will happen. The potential danger will depend on the robot's size, abilities, and what it's doing.
One problem that will need to be solved is that of operator distraction. If adverse things can happen when a distracted operator is actually hands on with a machine, imagine what could happen with one controlled only by thoughts.
Are they robots or androids? We're not exactly sure. Each talking, gesturing Geminoid looks exactly like a real individual, starting with their creator, professor Hiroshi Ishiguro of Osaka University in Japan.
For industrial control applications, or even a simple assembly line, that machine can go almost 24/7 without a break. But what happens when the task is a little more complex? That’s where the “smart” machine would come in. The smart machine is one that has some simple (or complex in some cases) processing capability to be able to adapt to changing conditions. Such machines are suited for a host of applications, including automotive, aerospace, defense, medical, computers and electronics, telecommunications, consumer goods, and so on. This discussion will examine what’s possible with smart machines, and what tradeoffs need to be made to implement such a solution.