Human pilots about to become extinct species

>>33974626

i'd like to see that dynamic and credible A.I. overcome a complete equipment blackout to land on an aircraft carrier in a storm

>>33974640
>i'd like to see that dynamic and credible A.I. overcome a complete equipment blackout to land on an aircraft carrier in a storm
It will happen a lot faster than you think.

File: 1474470911118.jpg (26KB, 500x307px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 500x307px

Another proof that F-35 was a huge waste of money. It will be no match to shittier planes piloted by AIs. You can send a dozen cheap-ass AI drones and they'll have a chance against human-piloted F-35.

>>33974626
naw people would still be needed for decisions

ai just goes in and Fucks shit up with no remorse

just play any modern rts or turn based game on the highest difficulty
same shit

besides this is all computer physics and shit
real world has too many variables

>>33974696
>decisions
Input objective parameters, get the AI to accomplish them.

issue is that if the enemy escalates with this type of system in the next 5 years, US will have to respond with a system of its own. then it's all over for human pilots.

>>33974662
i doubt it

A.I. is just a new fad tech people (including me) attribute magical skills and what not but the truth is were still a good way away from A.I. even overcoming simple activities like walking

>>33974732
>fad tech
you're an idiot. it's changing everything around us. from transportation to work and society itself.

>>33974761
ok steve

>>33974640
An equipment blackout (sensors) just means that you have no input. The AI still knows where it is, because it knows where it isn't, and it's not as if the target (the aircraft carrier) is going to move anytime soon.
Either way better back in pieces than in the ocean.

>>33974717
You're missing the point. In Machine Learning, there is always error. In something as critical as killing someone, as RoE needs to be followed, you need a human to send the order to kill. There are zero people comfortable with the idea of having AI both designate and decide to kill targets.

>>33974870
you'd rather it crash on the carrier than ditch nearby and recover the pilot?

>>33974931
I'm pretty sure the idea is that there is no pilot.

>>33974953
>Either way better back in pieces than in the ocean.

then i don't understand this at all

>>33974964
The machine probably isn't smart enough to blow itself up to prevent leaking of state secrets, or at least if there's an equipment blackout, you're apparently not going to get a self destruct signal.

>>33974991
thats kinda my point in the positive toward keeping human pilots over AI only

nothing can really beat dead reckoning or just a well timed scientific wild ass guess that humans are capable of

>>33974626
let the oldies step down and get replaced by a generation of remote piloting ex counterstrike kids on redbull and we will see. Secondly if he has never faced a simulation of this level no one has, but people will, better people, because the simulations were harder.

>>33975017
Oh, so that's what this is about.
Well, no one really likes the idea of AI-only planes--the primary concern is communication distances. But you need to have an AI-only plane, because then you get that sweet no-cockpit reduced drag design, and you can perform higher-G maneuvers.
That's why the prevailing mode of thought is to have a single pilot leading a swarm of drones of similar make and model. This way you get a man on the scene who can make snap decisions, and you get AI that are better than humans at literally everything else

>>33974626
>Video Game AI cranked up against a human player

File: https___blueprint-api-production.s3.amazonaws.com_uploads_card_image_399693_cc9195e6-ebe9-4f56-98e9-f4a409cdc75d[1].png (660KB, 1200x534px) Image search: [Google]

660KB, 1200x534px

>>33975051

File: 1491688424572.jpg (61KB, 720x543px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 720x543px

>>33974732
See here the generational learning AI that learned to jump over a moving object with 0% prior input from the programmer. Too lazy to find the link on YouTube.

>>33974684
Well why not get rid of the cockpit and just insert an A.I. if that's the case?

>>33975104
vidya gaem AI is a completely different beast

the world operates on physics determined by a strict set of rules that are simple to determine a yes/no answer on

the real world has way more rules and some can't get yes/no answers

>>33974626
Konosuba was the shit.

>>33975151
You mean this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pgaEE27nsQw

>>33975151

a machine controlled by AI jumped over a moving object with 0% prior input?

ROBOTS ARE TAKING OVER! I WARNED YOU! YOU ALL LAUGHED!

>>33974684
...you can just fit said f35 with AI. Congrats, those drones are now useless.

>>33974732
>Fad tech
Jesus christ how old are you?
That's like saying guided missiles are a fad. It's the next step.

AI can already do that and more easily though? Have you never seen boston dynamics robots?

File: x9-ghost-lineart.gif (205KB, 1200x893px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 1200x893px

>>33974626
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvZ4xAle6r0

>>33975160
now holds moar 30mm

>>33974732
You'll say that until A.I. becomes smart enough to learn it's way around human imposed limits and we get Skynet born.

>>33975080
>The year is 2017
>We have men guiding drones across the ocean

>The year is 2032
>We have a pilot on scene and controlling the engagements of a squad of 5 fighter jets that can out shoot, out fly, and out kill the best of the best
It's like 3D chess with more speed and explosions!

>>33975174
This one is also very nice
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd1yvLWm6oA&index=2&list=PLHFiqDkNCp1gaKu4HQwL9-S3eIDmAHIUw

>>33975104
An average video game player behind the stick of a fighter jet would crash his plane (with no survivors) almost immediately.

>>33975189
>...you can just fit said f35 with AI. Congrats, those drones are now useless.
Not really. It comes down the # of F-35 units you can produce and armament needed to take down cheaper drones. Issue is that you can produce a shitton of cheap drones and outfit them with relatively simple armament and AI brains.

File: ohio danger.jpg (38KB, 599x373px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 599x373px

soon

>>33974640
> a complete equipment blackout
No modern fly-by-wire aircraft can overcome this. because you know they have control surfaces activated by this equipment. Imagine horrors of old geezers when LM rolled out F-16...

>>33975305
or nuclear reactors will be in every house hold device including VR headsets or hologram rooms

theres a certain point where AI only craft will be the best option but were very far from that point

>>33976826
thats my argument famalam

meat intellect trumps silicon smarts for now

>>33974870
>The AI still knows where it is, because it knows where it isn't.
Not only is A.I putting pilots out of work, but the missiles too?

>>33976903
they also operate without power apparently

>human pilot loses all equipment
>"oh fug better bail"
>land in sorgum field near skunk works

>AI pilot loses all equipment
>

>>33976016
And considering the problems modern fighter craft have with single f22s in sim, your argument is still nonsense.

Not sure about military but on the civilian side, the technology to make human pilots obsolete has been around for DECADES. If it weren't for unions, people being afraid, and the FAA requiring a human pilot, there would be no human pilots on commercial flights.

>>33976834
Your argument is what? That we should ditch fly-by-wire?

What he said was a human pilot in a modern plane in those conditions would crash just the same as the hypothetical AI pilot.

>>33974696
>just play any modern rts or turn based game on the highest difficulty
You mean the plane AI will make horribly retarded decisions while cheating itself 5 billion missiles of all types, armor that would put a reinforced bunker to shame, all the fuel in the universe and full blown omniscence on it's plane?

>>33976826
What EFCS equipped plane doesn't have a mech mode?

>>33974626
you're assuming the boneheads in the military would trust their men's lives and millions of dollars of equipment to something that needs scheduled maintenance.

no matter how advanced these planes get there will always be human pilots for redundancy, because at the end of the day, if something fails, you're talking about a big fucking metal object flying at hundreds of miles an hour out of control. doesn't end well most times.

>>33974626
We already have AI that regularly beats pilots in dogfights.

It's called the aim-9x and aim-120, they are very cheap compared to a plane and very spammable.

This has been coming for a long time. Like, since the mid-60s when Cat III autoland systems were perfected. Operating a vehicle is exactly the kind of thing that computers are good at, and once sensors got good enough to let them do it, it was inevitable that they would. Computers - even right now - can probably do about 95% of the vehicle-operating tasks out there, and that includes everything from flying fighter jets to driving your Uber cab home. And they will; it's just a matter of time.

>>33979041
The F-16, also any plane using EHAs can't survive a loss of electrical power naturally

File: 1478760618465.jpg (21KB, 427x427px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 427x427px

>>33975051
>Tfw when top Warthunder and DCS players will be the best recruits for the upcoming generation of drone pilots.

>>33979182
>not based Ace Combat
Is like you don't want to reclaim rightful Belkan clay

>>33974626
About fucking time.

Tbh this had always seemed to me what the f35s long term role was, with all its data connectivity and sensors it seemed like it would end up the controller for a drone swarm. I also agree with the other anon about ai in commercial planes, one of the hardest things for ai to deal with is the unexpected (obviously) and on the ground in a car this can take many many forms which is why it's quite difficult. In the air things are a lot more predictable, usually if something goes wrong it's because of mechanical failure, not a kid suddenly appearing behind a stationary car, and these failures all have very set procedures to deal with them which an ai could honestly perform much faster than a human. Human pilots are still around primarily for the same reason the cockpit is at the front, for the confidence they give the passengers. Otherwise it's machines all the way. Freight flights are already being done by computers

>>33975330
good song anon, very fitting.

>>33974626
Until they actually get an AI into a physical, working plane, all this proves is that this is the equivalent of hardcore video game AI that basically cheats to beat you.

File: 1477701807614.jpg (6KB, 254x198px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 254x198px

>>33979283
>basically cheats
you're a retard. algorithms that learn are not cheating.

>AI is better than human pilots because muh high g's
>AI can't replace human pilots because muh decisionmaking

These are blatantly ignorant opinions to hold.

Yes, AI isn't limited at 9G, but blade strikes still cap turbine survivability around 20G; and G's haven't been the deciding factor in a god-damned thing since AESA and datalinks were invented.

2, AI are better at decision making. That's the fucking point of this particular one - it wins through better tactics and situational awareness, despite using inferior aircraft, by checking sensors hundreds of times a second and maintaining a superior tactical calculus. Air combat is hard for humans, for machines its merely 3d chess (unlike ground combat).

>>33979283
Wrong. This used full inputs and outputs from a standard simulator for both sides. "cheating" like some starcraft program getting free minerals had nothing to do with it.

>>33979069
When the calculus in the US is that losing even a handful of human lives is a tragedy while literally untold billions of dollars can be thrown away without batting an eye, machines will be replacing humans at every available opportunity.

Sure having yet another piece of complex machinery to maintain is an enormous pain in the ass, but eliminating a human life from being at risk and having the production of new pilots be as easy as Ctrl-c Ctrl-v instead of an expensive and time consuming training process is an incredible advantage.

So, we Ace Combat 3: Electrosphere anytime soon?

>>33974626
It'll all be drones and human pilots plus heavy ai assistance.

>>33979813
>ai assistance
Humans will become useless very quick. AI can respond a lot faster and humans will only slow it down.

>>33974626
I'm sure they'll let you play online.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qUBgfKiV0Kc

>>33974684
Except the F-35 will shoot down anything less than an F-22 way before they can even target the F-35.

>>33974640
I'd like to see a pilot overcome a complete equipment blackout...

>what is fly-by-wire?

>>33974626
Aircraft will still have pilots because AF HQ are all ex-pilots.
E.g. Why is there P-8 when there is Triton.
>muh pilots

>>33979680
yet trust runs incredibly deep in the military and even the troops on the ground are not going to be keen about marine.exe shooting bombs around them

when something inevitably goes wrong who are you going to blame?

"Whoops all your sons died because of faulty equipment, sorry"

It the same reason why fully self driving cars aren't really going to catch on.

File: tiddy.jpg (198KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

198KB, 1920x1080px

>>33974626
>Apply to become paper pushing officer
>Watch anime all day and collect bennies while robots drop all the bombs

Sounds like a dream come true to me.

>>33974626
But anon, we don't dogfight anymore.

File: 1494466540858.jpg (51KB, 1024x576px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 1024x576px

>>33975173

Indeed.

File: Stinger.jpg (34KB, 722x422px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 722x422px

Fuck you skynet and fuck your robots

File: Flakvierling-38-20mm-hatzerim-1[1].jpg (262KB, 1092x972px) Image search: [Google]

262KB, 1092x972px

>>33981000
They'll hack into the Stinger's IFF and homing system.
Only one way to be sure.

With upgrades, of course...

no fucking military is dumb enough to give their entire airforce to AI. we all know what would happen.

>>33979182
>drone pilots
Wow. Keep those goals low, lad.

File: laughing at you.gif (73KB, 675x227px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 675x227px

>>33981720
>he gets his stances on an issue from movies he watched