Harvesting automated war machines
$begingroup$
Let`s say there is a planet on which fully automated machines capable of self replication, once belonging to several factions of highly advanced aliens, now extinct, are waging war against each other. The primary goal is to destroy all machines of the opposing factions before the planet`s resources run out. Zero tolerance, zero diplomacy.
Their AI is relatively primitive, with the sole basic imperative of search-and-destroy, but they are able to gain experience and pass it over. The only limiting factor to that is the built-in self-destruct capability: if some machine ever becomes self-conscious that is seen as a fatal deficiency, leading to an imminent and uncancellable self-destruct.
Orbiting that planet is the first-and-as-of-yet-only interstellar vessel built and operated by humans. The weaponry installed on it is vastly inferior to what is being used on and below the surface and in the atmosphere of the planet, but the science and engineering teams on board are eager to try and salvage as much as possible from that planet for research.
How can they do that? Which conditions may open an opportunity to capture and examine at least some of the machines without losing the ship?
Some communication protocols of the machines resemble what humans captured via subluminal communication and decoded long before the expedition, but the vast majority of the data is encrypted with quantum-proof cryptoalgorithms.
[UPD:]
The obvious method of salvaging the defunct remains is not going to work: all debris are being thoroughly collected by the winners and then used for self-replication.
The other obvious method of collecting asteroids from the outskirts of the star system and then unleashing the meteor shower, effectively destroying everything altogether, is suboptimal: in that case all machines would be reduced to debris.
warfare space-travel artificial-intelligence space-warfare
edited 9 mins ago
Cyn
5,916935
asked 4 hours ago
hidefromkgbhidefromkgb
1855
$endgroup$
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
Let`s say there is a planet on which fully automated machines capable of self replication, once belonging to several factions of highly advanced aliens, now extinct, are waging war against each other. The primary goal is to destroy all machines of the opposing factions before the planet`s resources run out. Zero tolerance, zero diplomacy.
Their AI is relatively primitive, with the sole basic imperative of search-and-destroy, but they are able to gain experience and pass it over. The only limiting factor to that is the built-in self-destruct capability: if some machine ever becomes self-conscious that is seen as a fatal deficiency, leading to an imminent and uncancellable self-destruct.
Orbiting that planet is the first-and-as-of-yet-only interstellar vessel built and operated by humans. The weaponry installed on it is vastly inferior to what is being used on and below the surface and in the atmosphere of the planet, but the science and engineering teams on board are eager to try and salvage as much as possible from that planet for research.
How can they do that? Which conditions may open an opportunity to capture and examine at least some of the machines without losing the ship?
Some communication protocols of the machines resemble what humans captured via subluminal communication and decoded long before the expedition, but the vast majority of the data is encrypted with quantum-proof cryptoalgorithms.
[UPD:]
The obvious method of salvaging the defunct remains is not going to work: all debris are being thoroughly collected by the winners and then used for self-replication.
The other obvious method of collecting asteroids from the outskirts of the star system and then unleashing the meteor shower, effectively destroying everything altogether, is suboptimal: in that case all machines would be reduced to debris.
warfare space-travel artificial-intelligence space-warfare
edited 9 mins ago
Cyn
5,916935
asked 4 hours ago
hidefromkgbhidefromkgb
1855
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
What's preventing them to go to the battlefield and retrieve the remains of the destroyed machines?
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb any inspiration drawn from Horizon Zero Dawn?
$endgroup$
– dot_Sp0T
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Are humans considered a faction they need to destroy and if only humans are on orbit do they consider them wiped out and by that carry useless not updated definition of humans?
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft updated the question.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft you simply have a program that looks for specific patterns. If they emerge you self-destruct. Human cells arent self-aware either yet individually they are capable of exactly this programming against cancer.
$endgroup$
– Demigan
3 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
Let`s say there is a planet on which fully automated machines capable of self replication, once belonging to several factions of highly advanced aliens, now extinct, are waging war against each other. The primary goal is to destroy all machines of the opposing factions before the planet`s resources run out. Zero tolerance, zero diplomacy.
Their AI is relatively primitive, with the sole basic imperative of search-and-destroy, but they are able to gain experience and pass it over. The only limiting factor to that is the built-in self-destruct capability: if some machine ever becomes self-conscious that is seen as a fatal deficiency, leading to an imminent and uncancellable self-destruct.
Orbiting that planet is the first-and-as-of-yet-only interstellar vessel built and operated by humans. The weaponry installed on it is vastly inferior to what is being used on and below the surface and in the atmosphere of the planet, but the science and engineering teams on board are eager to try and salvage as much as possible from that planet for research.
How can they do that? Which conditions may open an opportunity to capture and examine at least some of the machines without losing the ship?
Some communication protocols of the machines resemble what humans captured via subluminal communication and decoded long before the expedition, but the vast majority of the data is encrypted with quantum-proof cryptoalgorithms.
[UPD:]
The obvious method of salvaging the defunct remains is not going to work: all debris are being thoroughly collected by the winners and then used for self-replication.
The other obvious method of collecting asteroids from the outskirts of the star system and then unleashing the meteor shower, effectively destroying everything altogether, is suboptimal: in that case all machines would be reduced to debris.
warfare space-travel artificial-intelligence space-warfare
edited 9 mins ago
Cyn
5,916935
asked 4 hours ago
hidefromkgbhidefromkgb
1855
$endgroup$
Let`s say there is a planet on which fully automated machines capable of self replication, once belonging to several factions of highly advanced aliens, now extinct, are waging war against each other. The primary goal is to destroy all machines of the opposing factions before the planet`s resources run out. Zero tolerance, zero diplomacy.
Their AI is relatively primitive, with the sole basic imperative of search-and-destroy, but they are able to gain experience and pass it over. The only limiting factor to that is the built-in self-destruct capability: if some machine ever becomes self-conscious that is seen as a fatal deficiency, leading to an imminent and uncancellable self-destruct.
Orbiting that planet is the first-and-as-of-yet-only interstellar vessel built and operated by humans. The weaponry installed on it is vastly inferior to what is being used on and below the surface and in the atmosphere of the planet, but the science and engineering teams on board are eager to try and salvage as much as possible from that planet for research.
How can they do that? Which conditions may open an opportunity to capture and examine at least some of the machines without losing the ship?
Some communication protocols of the machines resemble what humans captured via subluminal communication and decoded long before the expedition, but the vast majority of the data is encrypted with quantum-proof cryptoalgorithms.
[UPD:]
The obvious method of salvaging the defunct remains is not going to work: all debris are being thoroughly collected by the winners and then used for self-replication.
The other obvious method of collecting asteroids from the outskirts of the star system and then unleashing the meteor shower, effectively destroying everything altogether, is suboptimal: in that case all machines would be reduced to debris.
warfare space-travel artificial-intelligence space-warfare
warfare space-travel artificial-intelligence space-warfare
edited 9 mins ago
Cyn
5,916935
asked 4 hours ago
hidefromkgbhidefromkgb
1855
edited 9 mins ago
Cyn
5,916935
asked 4 hours ago
hidefromkgbhidefromkgb
1855
edited 9 mins ago
Cyn
5,916935
edited 9 mins ago
Cyn
5,916935
edited 9 mins ago
Cyn
5,916935
5,916935
asked 4 hours ago
hidefromkgbhidefromkgb
1855
asked 4 hours ago
hidefromkgbhidefromkgb
1855
asked 4 hours ago
hidefromkgbhidefromkgb
1855
1855
$begingroup$
What's preventing them to go to the battlefield and retrieve the remains of the destroyed machines?
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb any inspiration drawn from Horizon Zero Dawn?
$endgroup$
– dot_Sp0T
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Are humans considered a faction they need to destroy and if only humans are on orbit do they consider them wiped out and by that carry useless not updated definition of humans?
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft updated the question.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft you simply have a program that looks for specific patterns. If they emerge you self-destruct. Human cells arent self-aware either yet individually they are capable of exactly this programming against cancer.
$endgroup$
– Demigan
3 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
$begingroup$
What's preventing them to go to the battlefield and retrieve the remains of the destroyed machines?
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb any inspiration drawn from Horizon Zero Dawn?
$endgroup$
– dot_Sp0T
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Are humans considered a faction they need to destroy and if only humans are on orbit do they consider them wiped out and by that carry useless not updated definition of humans?
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft updated the question.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft you simply have a program that looks for specific patterns. If they emerge you self-destruct. Human cells arent self-aware either yet individually they are capable of exactly this programming against cancer.
$endgroup$
– Demigan
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
What's preventing them to go to the battlefield and retrieve the remains of the destroyed machines?
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
What's preventing them to go to the battlefield and retrieve the remains of the destroyed machines?
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb any inspiration drawn from Horizon Zero Dawn?
$endgroup$
– dot_Sp0T
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb any inspiration drawn from Horizon Zero Dawn?
$endgroup$
– dot_Sp0T
4 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Are humans considered a faction they need to destroy and if only humans are on orbit do they consider them wiped out and by that carry useless not updated definition of humans?
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Are humans considered a faction they need to destroy and if only humans are on orbit do they consider them wiped out and by that carry useless not updated definition of humans?
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft updated the question.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft updated the question.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft you simply have a program that looks for specific patterns. If they emerge you self-destruct. Human cells arent self-aware either yet individually they are capable of exactly this programming against cancer.
$endgroup$
– Demigan
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft you simply have a program that looks for specific patterns. If they emerge you self-destruct. Human cells arent self-aware either yet individually they are capable of exactly this programming against cancer.
$endgroup$
– Demigan
3 hours ago
|
show 6 more comments
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It depends on how the machines are programmed to recognize the enemy and tell it apart from a non enemy.
There should basically be three categories:
- friends
- enemies
- not worth being attacked
With the last covering anything which doesn't have to be addressed by attacks. Think of a soldier guarding an ammunition deposit being trained not to shoot at running rabbits.
If the machines are using the third category and the humans are able to be categorized in the third category, they might try to capture some samples.
Maybe send some probes just to test the reactions of the machines and test the existence of the third category.
I don't imagine this working for long time, though. Once the abductions start, the AI will react.
edited 3 hours ago
Separatrix
79.3k31186308
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦L.Dutch
79.8k26191388
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If the AI is primitive, it will most likely prioritize destroying enemies over collecting spoils for self-replication. The humans could try to exploit this by hiding in the perimeter of a current fight and snatching up destroyed robots or parts thereof as long as there are still enemies left.
If they're lucky, the AI only starts the "self-replicate" routine to analyze the immediate surroundings for salvagable debries after the "kill enemy" routine is finished and the threat is over. As long as humans are not categorized as enemies, they're ignored by the "kill enemies" routine. As long as they stop scavanging before the fight is over, the "self-replicate" routine doesn't recognize them as the resource-stealing thieves they are.
This could do for some nice action scenes. The debries need to be snatched up in the middle of a fight and be transported out of sensor range. If one AI recognizes a robot dangling from a towing hook as "moving enemy", the humans might find themselves under direct fire very soon.
answered 3 hours ago
ElmyElmy
10.8k11849
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Don't be hasty.
Fundamentally, harvesting an alien battle machine that outguns your analysis team isn't really "harvesting." It's hunting a reasonably intelligent and highly dangerous prey.
Hunting requires knowing the habits and characteristics of the prey, which humans generally learn by prolonged observation.
The humans' great advantage is surprise. Once that advantage is lost, and the machines learn of humans and determine that they are a threat, further investigation will be (essentially) impossible. Therefore, a characteristic of each hunt must be that the other alien machines do not learn of the humans.
A successful hunt requires careful planning: Since we know the machines communicate, the target machine must be isolated lest it pass on knowledge of the hunters (and it's observations of their characteristics - it's a hunter, too) to it's bretheren. If other machines will investigate, analysis time on the ground may be limited, and evasion/escape plans must be ready and practiced. And a deception plan is necessary - the other machines must reasonably determine that the lost machine was due to some already-known cause.
The Captain's overriding concern will be that the alien machines do not learn of the home of the humans (Earth) and it's location, lest they show unexpected capabilities and take the fight from Cybertron to Earth. That means hunting teams must be sanitized, and space-based analysis must take place outside the ship on some other (sanitized) platform. A secondary goal will be that the alien machines do not learn of the humans at all, so future expeditions will be possible.
answered 26 mins ago
user535733user535733
7,98921733
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Diplomacy
You send each A.I. a message of peace and alliance. You offer to help them in their war and propose joint plans of machine-building and resource-gathering exchanging technology and means. Then you try to play with your both deck of cards as long as possible. Pray not to be discovered.
answered 4 hours ago
RekesoftRekesoft
5,9611234
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Impossible. In the situation described, from the POV of an AI diplomacy implies resisting the basic imperative, i.e. self-consciousness.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Self-consciousness and intelligence are less related than you think. We have a lot of automated systems which can negotiate things among themselves or with other entities. If the AI's are forbidden to talk with anybody, not just the enemy, make it explicit in the question.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Well, I did state that. > Zero tolerance, zero diplomacy.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Yeah, well, in the context I assumed you were talking about no diplomacy with the enemy.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That`s also been covered.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There is a saying in Poland "where two are fighting the third one profit".
So humans can try to hide and wait for the opportunity of watching a skirmish of two factions which give them an idea of what weapons they use, what strategies they have and strong and weak points. Then when one side is defeated they come in and finish the second. That way they have materials from two factions so the can cross examine technology, CPU and coding. The can also see what machines use to distinguish themselves from enemy group.
That would be sufficient to try and capture (in same manner) additional factions machines. And then just program a virus to kill them all.
answered 4 hours ago
SZCZERZO KŁYSZCZERZO KŁY
16.8k22553
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The idea is good as long the difference in technology is not that big as the survivors of the battle being able to wipe up the floor with the petty human armies. The question specifies "vastly inferior", but it could be either in numbers or in technology. I presume the second, or they wouldn't be willing to risk so much to get it.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft in some small skirmish the "vastly inferior" don't mean a thing as weakened and small amount cannot compare to humans (remember how humans hunted Mammoths). For example Robots may not use EMP for obvious reasons while human can strip naked and sneak just with that.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
A whole macedonian phalanx may think they have nothing to fear of the lone man with the strange vases at his back, but it will melt away quickly once he starts using the flamethrower. The difference in technology can be all, if the difference is big enough. Maybe our weapons are completely incapable to make an scratch in their armor.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
The thing act different when they seen and know against what they fighting and they decide it's better to throw sarrisa. Observe, conclude, adapt.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
38 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
- Grab an intact machine (any machine)
- Copy out the operating system
- Release the machine unharmed, or destroy it in orbit if unharmed isn't possible from Step 2
- Reverse engineer the code to locate vulnerability, specifically, regarding installing malware.
- Find what causes the the self awareness self-destruct to trigger.
- Create a worm that triggers one or more of the self-destruct conditions
- Release the worm by broadcasting on the machines' communications channels
answered 1 hour ago
nzamannzaman
9,41411544
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Do you have any suggestions as to how step 1 can be accomplished?
$endgroup$
– Chronocidal
6 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f136840%2fharvesting-automated-war-machines%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
6 Answers
6
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It depends on how the machines are programmed to recognize the enemy and tell it apart from a non enemy.
There should basically be three categories:
- friends
- enemies
- not worth being attacked
With the last covering anything which doesn't have to be addressed by attacks. Think of a soldier guarding an ammunition deposit being trained not to shoot at running rabbits.
If the machines are using the third category and the humans are able to be categorized in the third category, they might try to capture some samples.
Maybe send some probes just to test the reactions of the machines and test the existence of the third category.
I don't imagine this working for long time, though. Once the abductions start, the AI will react.
edited 3 hours ago
Separatrix
79.3k31186308
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦L.Dutch
79.8k26191388
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It depends on how the machines are programmed to recognize the enemy and tell it apart from a non enemy.
There should basically be three categories:
- friends
- enemies
- not worth being attacked
With the last covering anything which doesn't have to be addressed by attacks. Think of a soldier guarding an ammunition deposit being trained not to shoot at running rabbits.
If the machines are using the third category and the humans are able to be categorized in the third category, they might try to capture some samples.
Maybe send some probes just to test the reactions of the machines and test the existence of the third category.
I don't imagine this working for long time, though. Once the abductions start, the AI will react.
edited 3 hours ago
Separatrix
79.3k31186308
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦L.Dutch
79.8k26191388
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It depends on how the machines are programmed to recognize the enemy and tell it apart from a non enemy.
There should basically be three categories:
- friends
- enemies
- not worth being attacked
With the last covering anything which doesn't have to be addressed by attacks. Think of a soldier guarding an ammunition deposit being trained not to shoot at running rabbits.
If the machines are using the third category and the humans are able to be categorized in the third category, they might try to capture some samples.
Maybe send some probes just to test the reactions of the machines and test the existence of the third category.
I don't imagine this working for long time, though. Once the abductions start, the AI will react.
edited 3 hours ago
Separatrix
79.3k31186308
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦L.Dutch
79.8k26191388
$endgroup$
It depends on how the machines are programmed to recognize the enemy and tell it apart from a non enemy.
There should basically be three categories:
- friends
- enemies
- not worth being attacked
With the last covering anything which doesn't have to be addressed by attacks. Think of a soldier guarding an ammunition deposit being trained not to shoot at running rabbits.
If the machines are using the third category and the humans are able to be categorized in the third category, they might try to capture some samples.
Maybe send some probes just to test the reactions of the machines and test the existence of the third category.
I don't imagine this working for long time, though. Once the abductions start, the AI will react.
edited 3 hours ago
Separatrix
79.3k31186308
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦L.Dutch
79.8k26191388
edited 3 hours ago
Separatrix
79.3k31186308
edited 3 hours ago
Separatrix
79.3k31186308
edited 3 hours ago
Separatrix
79.3k31186308
79.3k31186308
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦L.Dutch
79.8k26191388
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦L.Dutch
79.8k26191388
answered 4 hours ago
L.Dutch♦L.Dutch
79.8k26191388
79.8k26191388
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If the AI is primitive, it will most likely prioritize destroying enemies over collecting spoils for self-replication. The humans could try to exploit this by hiding in the perimeter of a current fight and snatching up destroyed robots or parts thereof as long as there are still enemies left.
If they're lucky, the AI only starts the "self-replicate" routine to analyze the immediate surroundings for salvagable debries after the "kill enemy" routine is finished and the threat is over. As long as humans are not categorized as enemies, they're ignored by the "kill enemies" routine. As long as they stop scavanging before the fight is over, the "self-replicate" routine doesn't recognize them as the resource-stealing thieves they are.
This could do for some nice action scenes. The debries need to be snatched up in the middle of a fight and be transported out of sensor range. If one AI recognizes a robot dangling from a towing hook as "moving enemy", the humans might find themselves under direct fire very soon.
answered 3 hours ago
ElmyElmy
10.8k11849
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If the AI is primitive, it will most likely prioritize destroying enemies over collecting spoils for self-replication. The humans could try to exploit this by hiding in the perimeter of a current fight and snatching up destroyed robots or parts thereof as long as there are still enemies left.
If they're lucky, the AI only starts the "self-replicate" routine to analyze the immediate surroundings for salvagable debries after the "kill enemy" routine is finished and the threat is over. As long as humans are not categorized as enemies, they're ignored by the "kill enemies" routine. As long as they stop scavanging before the fight is over, the "self-replicate" routine doesn't recognize them as the resource-stealing thieves they are.
This could do for some nice action scenes. The debries need to be snatched up in the middle of a fight and be transported out of sensor range. If one AI recognizes a robot dangling from a towing hook as "moving enemy", the humans might find themselves under direct fire very soon.
answered 3 hours ago
ElmyElmy
10.8k11849
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If the AI is primitive, it will most likely prioritize destroying enemies over collecting spoils for self-replication. The humans could try to exploit this by hiding in the perimeter of a current fight and snatching up destroyed robots or parts thereof as long as there are still enemies left.
If they're lucky, the AI only starts the "self-replicate" routine to analyze the immediate surroundings for salvagable debries after the "kill enemy" routine is finished and the threat is over. As long as humans are not categorized as enemies, they're ignored by the "kill enemies" routine. As long as they stop scavanging before the fight is over, the "self-replicate" routine doesn't recognize them as the resource-stealing thieves they are.
This could do for some nice action scenes. The debries need to be snatched up in the middle of a fight and be transported out of sensor range. If one AI recognizes a robot dangling from a towing hook as "moving enemy", the humans might find themselves under direct fire very soon.
answered 3 hours ago
ElmyElmy
10.8k11849
$endgroup$
If the AI is primitive, it will most likely prioritize destroying enemies over collecting spoils for self-replication. The humans could try to exploit this by hiding in the perimeter of a current fight and snatching up destroyed robots or parts thereof as long as there are still enemies left.
If they're lucky, the AI only starts the "self-replicate" routine to analyze the immediate surroundings for salvagable debries after the "kill enemy" routine is finished and the threat is over. As long as humans are not categorized as enemies, they're ignored by the "kill enemies" routine. As long as they stop scavanging before the fight is over, the "self-replicate" routine doesn't recognize them as the resource-stealing thieves they are.
This could do for some nice action scenes. The debries need to be snatched up in the middle of a fight and be transported out of sensor range. If one AI recognizes a robot dangling from a towing hook as "moving enemy", the humans might find themselves under direct fire very soon.
answered 3 hours ago
ElmyElmy
10.8k11849
answered 3 hours ago
ElmyElmy
10.8k11849
answered 3 hours ago
ElmyElmy
10.8k11849
answered 3 hours ago
ElmyElmy
10.8k11849
10.8k11849
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Don't be hasty.
Fundamentally, harvesting an alien battle machine that outguns your analysis team isn't really "harvesting." It's hunting a reasonably intelligent and highly dangerous prey.
Hunting requires knowing the habits and characteristics of the prey, which humans generally learn by prolonged observation.
The humans' great advantage is surprise. Once that advantage is lost, and the machines learn of humans and determine that they are a threat, further investigation will be (essentially) impossible. Therefore, a characteristic of each hunt must be that the other alien machines do not learn of the humans.
A successful hunt requires careful planning: Since we know the machines communicate, the target machine must be isolated lest it pass on knowledge of the hunters (and it's observations of their characteristics - it's a hunter, too) to it's bretheren. If other machines will investigate, analysis time on the ground may be limited, and evasion/escape plans must be ready and practiced. And a deception plan is necessary - the other machines must reasonably determine that the lost machine was due to some already-known cause.
The Captain's overriding concern will be that the alien machines do not learn of the home of the humans (Earth) and it's location, lest they show unexpected capabilities and take the fight from Cybertron to Earth. That means hunting teams must be sanitized, and space-based analysis must take place outside the ship on some other (sanitized) platform. A secondary goal will be that the alien machines do not learn of the humans at all, so future expeditions will be possible.
answered 26 mins ago
user535733user535733
7,98921733
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Don't be hasty.
Fundamentally, harvesting an alien battle machine that outguns your analysis team isn't really "harvesting." It's hunting a reasonably intelligent and highly dangerous prey.
Hunting requires knowing the habits and characteristics of the prey, which humans generally learn by prolonged observation.
The humans' great advantage is surprise. Once that advantage is lost, and the machines learn of humans and determine that they are a threat, further investigation will be (essentially) impossible. Therefore, a characteristic of each hunt must be that the other alien machines do not learn of the humans.
A successful hunt requires careful planning: Since we know the machines communicate, the target machine must be isolated lest it pass on knowledge of the hunters (and it's observations of their characteristics - it's a hunter, too) to it's bretheren. If other machines will investigate, analysis time on the ground may be limited, and evasion/escape plans must be ready and practiced. And a deception plan is necessary - the other machines must reasonably determine that the lost machine was due to some already-known cause.
The Captain's overriding concern will be that the alien machines do not learn of the home of the humans (Earth) and it's location, lest they show unexpected capabilities and take the fight from Cybertron to Earth. That means hunting teams must be sanitized, and space-based analysis must take place outside the ship on some other (sanitized) platform. A secondary goal will be that the alien machines do not learn of the humans at all, so future expeditions will be possible.
answered 26 mins ago
user535733user535733
7,98921733
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Don't be hasty.
Fundamentally, harvesting an alien battle machine that outguns your analysis team isn't really "harvesting." It's hunting a reasonably intelligent and highly dangerous prey.
Hunting requires knowing the habits and characteristics of the prey, which humans generally learn by prolonged observation.
The humans' great advantage is surprise. Once that advantage is lost, and the machines learn of humans and determine that they are a threat, further investigation will be (essentially) impossible. Therefore, a characteristic of each hunt must be that the other alien machines do not learn of the humans.
A successful hunt requires careful planning: Since we know the machines communicate, the target machine must be isolated lest it pass on knowledge of the hunters (and it's observations of their characteristics - it's a hunter, too) to it's bretheren. If other machines will investigate, analysis time on the ground may be limited, and evasion/escape plans must be ready and practiced. And a deception plan is necessary - the other machines must reasonably determine that the lost machine was due to some already-known cause.
The Captain's overriding concern will be that the alien machines do not learn of the home of the humans (Earth) and it's location, lest they show unexpected capabilities and take the fight from Cybertron to Earth. That means hunting teams must be sanitized, and space-based analysis must take place outside the ship on some other (sanitized) platform. A secondary goal will be that the alien machines do not learn of the humans at all, so future expeditions will be possible.
answered 26 mins ago
user535733user535733
7,98921733
$endgroup$
Don't be hasty.
Fundamentally, harvesting an alien battle machine that outguns your analysis team isn't really "harvesting." It's hunting a reasonably intelligent and highly dangerous prey.
Hunting requires knowing the habits and characteristics of the prey, which humans generally learn by prolonged observation.
The humans' great advantage is surprise. Once that advantage is lost, and the machines learn of humans and determine that they are a threat, further investigation will be (essentially) impossible. Therefore, a characteristic of each hunt must be that the other alien machines do not learn of the humans.
A successful hunt requires careful planning: Since we know the machines communicate, the target machine must be isolated lest it pass on knowledge of the hunters (and it's observations of their characteristics - it's a hunter, too) to it's bretheren. If other machines will investigate, analysis time on the ground may be limited, and evasion/escape plans must be ready and practiced. And a deception plan is necessary - the other machines must reasonably determine that the lost machine was due to some already-known cause.
The Captain's overriding concern will be that the alien machines do not learn of the home of the humans (Earth) and it's location, lest they show unexpected capabilities and take the fight from Cybertron to Earth. That means hunting teams must be sanitized, and space-based analysis must take place outside the ship on some other (sanitized) platform. A secondary goal will be that the alien machines do not learn of the humans at all, so future expeditions will be possible.
answered 26 mins ago
user535733user535733
7,98921733
answered 26 mins ago
user535733user535733
7,98921733
answered 26 mins ago
user535733user535733
7,98921733
answered 26 mins ago
user535733user535733
7,98921733
7,98921733
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Diplomacy
You send each A.I. a message of peace and alliance. You offer to help them in their war and propose joint plans of machine-building and resource-gathering exchanging technology and means. Then you try to play with your both deck of cards as long as possible. Pray not to be discovered.
answered 4 hours ago
RekesoftRekesoft
5,9611234
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Impossible. In the situation described, from the POV of an AI diplomacy implies resisting the basic imperative, i.e. self-consciousness.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Self-consciousness and intelligence are less related than you think. We have a lot of automated systems which can negotiate things among themselves or with other entities. If the AI's are forbidden to talk with anybody, not just the enemy, make it explicit in the question.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Well, I did state that. > Zero tolerance, zero diplomacy.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Yeah, well, in the context I assumed you were talking about no diplomacy with the enemy.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That`s also been covered.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Diplomacy
You send each A.I. a message of peace and alliance. You offer to help them in their war and propose joint plans of machine-building and resource-gathering exchanging technology and means. Then you try to play with your both deck of cards as long as possible. Pray not to be discovered.
answered 4 hours ago
RekesoftRekesoft
5,9611234
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Impossible. In the situation described, from the POV of an AI diplomacy implies resisting the basic imperative, i.e. self-consciousness.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Self-consciousness and intelligence are less related than you think. We have a lot of automated systems which can negotiate things among themselves or with other entities. If the AI's are forbidden to talk with anybody, not just the enemy, make it explicit in the question.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Well, I did state that. > Zero tolerance, zero diplomacy.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Yeah, well, in the context I assumed you were talking about no diplomacy with the enemy.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That`s also been covered.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Diplomacy
You send each A.I. a message of peace and alliance. You offer to help them in their war and propose joint plans of machine-building and resource-gathering exchanging technology and means. Then you try to play with your both deck of cards as long as possible. Pray not to be discovered.
answered 4 hours ago
RekesoftRekesoft
5,9611234
$endgroup$
Diplomacy
You send each A.I. a message of peace and alliance. You offer to help them in their war and propose joint plans of machine-building and resource-gathering exchanging technology and means. Then you try to play with your both deck of cards as long as possible. Pray not to be discovered.
answered 4 hours ago
RekesoftRekesoft
5,9611234
answered 4 hours ago
RekesoftRekesoft
5,9611234
answered 4 hours ago
RekesoftRekesoft
5,9611234
answered 4 hours ago
RekesoftRekesoft
5,9611234
5,9611234
$begingroup$
Impossible. In the situation described, from the POV of an AI diplomacy implies resisting the basic imperative, i.e. self-consciousness.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Self-consciousness and intelligence are less related than you think. We have a lot of automated systems which can negotiate things among themselves or with other entities. If the AI's are forbidden to talk with anybody, not just the enemy, make it explicit in the question.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Well, I did state that. > Zero tolerance, zero diplomacy.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Yeah, well, in the context I assumed you were talking about no diplomacy with the enemy.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That`s also been covered.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Impossible. In the situation described, from the POV of an AI diplomacy implies resisting the basic imperative, i.e. self-consciousness.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Self-consciousness and intelligence are less related than you think. We have a lot of automated systems which can negotiate things among themselves or with other entities. If the AI's are forbidden to talk with anybody, not just the enemy, make it explicit in the question.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Well, I did state that. > Zero tolerance, zero diplomacy.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Yeah, well, in the context I assumed you were talking about no diplomacy with the enemy.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That`s also been covered.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Impossible. In the situation described, from the POV of an AI diplomacy implies resisting the basic imperative, i.e. self-consciousness.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Impossible. In the situation described, from the POV of an AI diplomacy implies resisting the basic imperative, i.e. self-consciousness.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Self-consciousness and intelligence are less related than you think. We have a lot of automated systems which can negotiate things among themselves or with other entities. If the AI's are forbidden to talk with anybody, not just the enemy, make it explicit in the question.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Self-consciousness and intelligence are less related than you think. We have a lot of automated systems which can negotiate things among themselves or with other entities. If the AI's are forbidden to talk with anybody, not just the enemy, make it explicit in the question.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Well, I did state that. > Zero tolerance, zero diplomacy.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Well, I did state that. > Zero tolerance, zero diplomacy.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Yeah, well, in the context I assumed you were talking about no diplomacy with the enemy.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb Yeah, well, in the context I assumed you were talking about no diplomacy with the enemy.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That`s also been covered.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
That`s also been covered.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There is a saying in Poland "where two are fighting the third one profit".
So humans can try to hide and wait for the opportunity of watching a skirmish of two factions which give them an idea of what weapons they use, what strategies they have and strong and weak points. Then when one side is defeated they come in and finish the second. That way they have materials from two factions so the can cross examine technology, CPU and coding. The can also see what machines use to distinguish themselves from enemy group.
That would be sufficient to try and capture (in same manner) additional factions machines. And then just program a virus to kill them all.
answered 4 hours ago
SZCZERZO KŁYSZCZERZO KŁY
16.8k22553
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The idea is good as long the difference in technology is not that big as the survivors of the battle being able to wipe up the floor with the petty human armies. The question specifies "vastly inferior", but it could be either in numbers or in technology. I presume the second, or they wouldn't be willing to risk so much to get it.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft in some small skirmish the "vastly inferior" don't mean a thing as weakened and small amount cannot compare to humans (remember how humans hunted Mammoths). For example Robots may not use EMP for obvious reasons while human can strip naked and sneak just with that.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
A whole macedonian phalanx may think they have nothing to fear of the lone man with the strange vases at his back, but it will melt away quickly once he starts using the flamethrower. The difference in technology can be all, if the difference is big enough. Maybe our weapons are completely incapable to make an scratch in their armor.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
The thing act different when they seen and know against what they fighting and they decide it's better to throw sarrisa. Observe, conclude, adapt.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
38 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There is a saying in Poland "where two are fighting the third one profit".
So humans can try to hide and wait for the opportunity of watching a skirmish of two factions which give them an idea of what weapons they use, what strategies they have and strong and weak points. Then when one side is defeated they come in and finish the second. That way they have materials from two factions so the can cross examine technology, CPU and coding. The can also see what machines use to distinguish themselves from enemy group.
That would be sufficient to try and capture (in same manner) additional factions machines. And then just program a virus to kill them all.
answered 4 hours ago
SZCZERZO KŁYSZCZERZO KŁY
16.8k22553
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
The idea is good as long the difference in technology is not that big as the survivors of the battle being able to wipe up the floor with the petty human armies. The question specifies "vastly inferior", but it could be either in numbers or in technology. I presume the second, or they wouldn't be willing to risk so much to get it.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft in some small skirmish the "vastly inferior" don't mean a thing as weakened and small amount cannot compare to humans (remember how humans hunted Mammoths). For example Robots may not use EMP for obvious reasons while human can strip naked and sneak just with that.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
A whole macedonian phalanx may think they have nothing to fear of the lone man with the strange vases at his back, but it will melt away quickly once he starts using the flamethrower. The difference in technology can be all, if the difference is big enough. Maybe our weapons are completely incapable to make an scratch in their armor.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
The thing act different when they seen and know against what they fighting and they decide it's better to throw sarrisa. Observe, conclude, adapt.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
38 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
There is a saying in Poland "where two are fighting the third one profit".
So humans can try to hide and wait for the opportunity of watching a skirmish of two factions which give them an idea of what weapons they use, what strategies they have and strong and weak points. Then when one side is defeated they come in and finish the second. That way they have materials from two factions so the can cross examine technology, CPU and coding. The can also see what machines use to distinguish themselves from enemy group.
That would be sufficient to try and capture (in same manner) additional factions machines. And then just program a virus to kill them all.
answered 4 hours ago
SZCZERZO KŁYSZCZERZO KŁY
16.8k22553
$endgroup$
There is a saying in Poland "where two are fighting the third one profit".
So humans can try to hide and wait for the opportunity of watching a skirmish of two factions which give them an idea of what weapons they use, what strategies they have and strong and weak points. Then when one side is defeated they come in and finish the second. That way they have materials from two factions so the can cross examine technology, CPU and coding. The can also see what machines use to distinguish themselves from enemy group.
That would be sufficient to try and capture (in same manner) additional factions machines. And then just program a virus to kill them all.
answered 4 hours ago
SZCZERZO KŁYSZCZERZO KŁY
16.8k22553
answered 4 hours ago
SZCZERZO KŁYSZCZERZO KŁY
16.8k22553
answered 4 hours ago
SZCZERZO KŁYSZCZERZO KŁY
16.8k22553
answered 4 hours ago
SZCZERZO KŁYSZCZERZO KŁY
16.8k22553
16.8k22553
$begingroup$
The idea is good as long the difference in technology is not that big as the survivors of the battle being able to wipe up the floor with the petty human armies. The question specifies "vastly inferior", but it could be either in numbers or in technology. I presume the second, or they wouldn't be willing to risk so much to get it.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft in some small skirmish the "vastly inferior" don't mean a thing as weakened and small amount cannot compare to humans (remember how humans hunted Mammoths). For example Robots may not use EMP for obvious reasons while human can strip naked and sneak just with that.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
A whole macedonian phalanx may think they have nothing to fear of the lone man with the strange vases at his back, but it will melt away quickly once he starts using the flamethrower. The difference in technology can be all, if the difference is big enough. Maybe our weapons are completely incapable to make an scratch in their armor.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
The thing act different when they seen and know against what they fighting and they decide it's better to throw sarrisa. Observe, conclude, adapt.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
38 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The idea is good as long the difference in technology is not that big as the survivors of the battle being able to wipe up the floor with the petty human armies. The question specifies "vastly inferior", but it could be either in numbers or in technology. I presume the second, or they wouldn't be willing to risk so much to get it.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
3 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft in some small skirmish the "vastly inferior" don't mean a thing as weakened and small amount cannot compare to humans (remember how humans hunted Mammoths). For example Robots may not use EMP for obvious reasons while human can strip naked and sneak just with that.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
A whole macedonian phalanx may think they have nothing to fear of the lone man with the strange vases at his back, but it will melt away quickly once he starts using the flamethrower. The difference in technology can be all, if the difference is big enough. Maybe our weapons are completely incapable to make an scratch in their armor.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
The thing act different when they seen and know against what they fighting and they decide it's better to throw sarrisa. Observe, conclude, adapt.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
38 mins ago
$begingroup$
The idea is good as long the difference in technology is not that big as the survivors of the battle being able to wipe up the floor with the petty human armies. The question specifies "vastly inferior", but it could be either in numbers or in technology. I presume the second, or they wouldn't be willing to risk so much to get it.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
The idea is good as long the difference in technology is not that big as the survivors of the battle being able to wipe up the floor with the petty human armies. The question specifies "vastly inferior", but it could be either in numbers or in technology. I presume the second, or they wouldn't be willing to risk so much to get it.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
3 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft in some small skirmish the "vastly inferior" don't mean a thing as weakened and small amount cannot compare to humans (remember how humans hunted Mammoths). For example Robots may not use EMP for obvious reasons while human can strip naked and sneak just with that.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft in some small skirmish the "vastly inferior" don't mean a thing as weakened and small amount cannot compare to humans (remember how humans hunted Mammoths). For example Robots may not use EMP for obvious reasons while human can strip naked and sneak just with that.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
A whole macedonian phalanx may think they have nothing to fear of the lone man with the strange vases at his back, but it will melt away quickly once he starts using the flamethrower. The difference in technology can be all, if the difference is big enough. Maybe our weapons are completely incapable to make an scratch in their armor.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
A whole macedonian phalanx may think they have nothing to fear of the lone man with the strange vases at his back, but it will melt away quickly once he starts using the flamethrower. The difference in technology can be all, if the difference is big enough. Maybe our weapons are completely incapable to make an scratch in their armor.
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
The thing act different when they seen and know against what they fighting and they decide it's better to throw sarrisa. Observe, conclude, adapt.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
38 mins ago
$begingroup$
The thing act different when they seen and know against what they fighting and they decide it's better to throw sarrisa. Observe, conclude, adapt.
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
38 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
- Grab an intact machine (any machine)
- Copy out the operating system
- Release the machine unharmed, or destroy it in orbit if unharmed isn't possible from Step 2
- Reverse engineer the code to locate vulnerability, specifically, regarding installing malware.
- Find what causes the the self awareness self-destruct to trigger.
- Create a worm that triggers one or more of the self-destruct conditions
- Release the worm by broadcasting on the machines' communications channels
answered 1 hour ago
nzamannzaman
9,41411544
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Do you have any suggestions as to how step 1 can be accomplished?
$endgroup$
– Chronocidal
6 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
- Grab an intact machine (any machine)
- Copy out the operating system
- Release the machine unharmed, or destroy it in orbit if unharmed isn't possible from Step 2
- Reverse engineer the code to locate vulnerability, specifically, regarding installing malware.
- Find what causes the the self awareness self-destruct to trigger.
- Create a worm that triggers one or more of the self-destruct conditions
- Release the worm by broadcasting on the machines' communications channels
answered 1 hour ago
nzamannzaman
9,41411544
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Do you have any suggestions as to how step 1 can be accomplished?
$endgroup$
– Chronocidal
6 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
- Grab an intact machine (any machine)
- Copy out the operating system
- Release the machine unharmed, or destroy it in orbit if unharmed isn't possible from Step 2
- Reverse engineer the code to locate vulnerability, specifically, regarding installing malware.
- Find what causes the the self awareness self-destruct to trigger.
- Create a worm that triggers one or more of the self-destruct conditions
- Release the worm by broadcasting on the machines' communications channels
answered 1 hour ago
nzamannzaman
9,41411544
$endgroup$
- Grab an intact machine (any machine)
- Copy out the operating system
- Release the machine unharmed, or destroy it in orbit if unharmed isn't possible from Step 2
- Reverse engineer the code to locate vulnerability, specifically, regarding installing malware.
- Find what causes the the self awareness self-destruct to trigger.
- Create a worm that triggers one or more of the self-destruct conditions
- Release the worm by broadcasting on the machines' communications channels
answered 1 hour ago
nzamannzaman
9,41411544
answered 1 hour ago
nzamannzaman
9,41411544
answered 1 hour ago
nzamannzaman
9,41411544
answered 1 hour ago
nzamannzaman
9,41411544
9,41411544
$begingroup$
Do you have any suggestions as to how step 1 can be accomplished?
$endgroup$
– Chronocidal
6 mins ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Do you have any suggestions as to how step 1 can be accomplished?
$endgroup$
– Chronocidal
6 mins ago
$begingroup$
Do you have any suggestions as to how step 1 can be accomplished?
$endgroup$
– Chronocidal
6 mins ago
$begingroup$
Do you have any suggestions as to how step 1 can be accomplished?
$endgroup$
– Chronocidal
6 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f136840%2fharvesting-automated-war-machines%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
var $window = $(window),
onScroll = function(e) {
var $elem = $('.new-login-left'),
docViewTop = $window.scrollTop(),
docViewBottom = docViewTop + $window.height(),
elemTop = $elem.offset().top,
elemBottom = elemTop + $elem.height();
if ((docViewTop elemBottom)) {
StackExchange.using('gps', function() { StackExchange.gps.track('embedded_signup_form.view', { location: 'question_page' }); });
$window.unbind('scroll', onScroll);
}
};
$window.on('scroll', onScroll);
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
What's preventing them to go to the battlefield and retrieve the remains of the destroyed machines?
$endgroup$
– Rekesoft
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@hidefromkgb any inspiration drawn from Horizon Zero Dawn?
$endgroup$
– dot_Sp0T
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
Are humans considered a faction they need to destroy and if only humans are on orbit do they consider them wiped out and by that carry useless not updated definition of humans?
$endgroup$
– SZCZERZO KŁY
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft updated the question.
$endgroup$
– hidefromkgb
4 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@Rekesoft you simply have a program that looks for specific patterns. If they emerge you self-destruct. Human cells arent self-aware either yet individually they are capable of exactly this programming against cancer.
$endgroup$
– Demigan
3 hours ago