Skip to main content

Military Robots and the Future of War


P.W. Singer in his Ted Talk discussed robotics in warfare and the repercussions that robotics could have on warfare and the perception of war. He presents his reasoning for what he says and it’s either based in history, like his point of there being no permanent first maneuver advantage or it being based in what is presently going on in the field of military robotics, like several projects handling aspects of fully autonomous weapon systems. He also keeps the audience interested with the occasional joke such as the a certain actor that was a governor showing up at your door. He is a military analyst and as such is an expert on how various things impact warfare. He speaks somewhat informally and uses hand gestures to highlight some of his important points. He makes heavy use of visual aids to really show that some of this stuff is real and currently in use. Overall he warns of the dangers that this leap in technology could bring, such as a decrease in the consequences of war. He also discusses how rapidly drones may advance due to advances in computer sciences. He also talks about how other countries are developing drones and how non-state aggressors can also gain access to drones. He does a good job of discussing a complex and constantly changing topic.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Weight of Glory

In Mr. Cline's class a few weeks ago. We took the day off in a way from our normal classes. Instead of continuing to read the books we were assigned and discussing them, he read us the sermon by C.S Lewis "The Weight of Glory." Its a long sermon, but one worth reading. It is about the confusion many people have on the topic of what we desire the most. He explains after much background information, that we all desire true happiness. And through that happiness, we long for heaven, our true home that we were designed for. He explains that glory is not what many people think of as being "famous" in heaven. But more that we are honored by our Lord and Father. For it to be like the scripture passage "Well done, good and faithful servant." C.S Lewis does a fantastic job at being persuasive here, and if read by the right person aloud, can have an excellent effect. He clears up lots of points that people bring up that are not true. Such as the point of glory...

Stephen Curry (Brita)

I saw this commercial for Brita water on YouTube and on T.V.  Stephen Curry, a professional basketball player that plays for the Golden State Warriors, endorses and promotes the product by saying "not all water is the same."  In this advertisement he makes Brita water seem better than the other leading brands of water by saying "You are what you drink."  He also says "some water can dribble, drain threes, or even drain a buzzer beater."  With these claims, he is implying that drinking the Brita water it could make you better at basketball and help you become better and as good as him. Brita uses a celebrity to sell it by implying that it could improve your basketball performance.  This advertisement is false because water is not going to change your skills and abilities.  It tries to persuade you to buy it because a professional basketball player drinks it.  I feel as though it may persuade some people to buy it because of Stephen Curry endorsing it....

Marilyn Monroe's Shampoo

While browsing on Google I found an old advertisement.  The ad was for Lustre-Crème Shampoo. It featured Marilyn Monroe, known for her beauteous looks and her parts in different movies. One of her movies was Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. Lustre-Crème was attempting to sell their shampoo through the use of fallacies. By saying that Marilyn Monroe that tells you nothing about the actual product: it simply attracts you to the pretty face in the picture. Using this as an argument of why someone should buy your product is quite illogical. Just because Marilyn Monroe uses it doesn’t provide assurance of its abilities. They attempt using snob appeal by trying to make the audience believe that they could be like Marilyn Monroe if they use the same product as her. They use appeal to illegitimate authority by using Marilyn Monroe to promote their product. Although she herself is a customer, this is still rather irrelevant. She herself has no type of expertise in hair products and knows nothing t...