Debate Civilization and Evil: A Debate

Yes - robots can barely walk up a flight of stairs. And I was referring to AI handling the complex task and leaving firing and flying to humans.

...Should be fairly obvious. If the wing is damaged, disconnect it and put on a new one.

Simple. The nanobots make it.

...They're in the food supply, remember?

Oh of course, but if they EMP their own factory, thats more expense for them at a fairly low cost for us.

Well personally I can't really see it being used for true military purposes; I was just tossing out examples of how to keep it low cost and/or really **** things up for the enemy.

If I had any idea what that book was....

 

And, for that matter, how are the people who are preaching the beliefs to know? The 'writer' or writers of the Quran? How do they know, if they have not already died? How do the current preachers know if the writers of the Quran are actually speaking the truth or false lies?

And I'm more or less working to whack away the 'prime reason' factor too. But that's just my atheist nature, so... heh.

I'm pretty sure Palestine isn't an isolationist nation to fend off all religions. It's religious differences has incurred the Israeli invasion and oppression. Those factors are probably a lot higher in priority in the list of reason for the suicide bombing than simple different thinkings.

No, I wouldn't think so, but they do have to stick somehow to the truth, and the goal of peace is likely one of the goals for Islamic religion.. like most other religions, except a few insane ones.

It says that they are using religion as justification for their actions, so they don't get labeled as complete savages from all views and are collectively eliminated.

Shrug. I'm a skeptic and I'm very cynical, so I wouldn't believe that if you did. Then again, I have become indifferent to the concept of death, so eh. Either way, the articles above gave a large connotation that they were bombing for their family's security, and to stake vengeance at the Israelis, rather than by the blessing of Allah.

Yes, but is this meshed religion truly used for its proper reason in politics (for both the Palestinians and Israel), or is it used just for the means of gaining land and world respect? To gain other such things such as military support? A very cloudy thing.

True.

And Moderate/Progressive Muslims were what they were before the oppression and the difficulties presented by Israel and the USA forced the minds of some of the more radical believers to do more violent things, to refer to the fanatic parts of the Quran more seriously - to apply them to actual actions. If the oppression was not there, and this occupation were not needed, then I doubt that such thoughts that led to suicide bombing would have emerged.

And it IS a version gone through by skeptics. It is quite obvious that they'll be looking for every mistake and wrong in the wording to exploit. What about the true meaning? Nobody knows what the writer meant by his words when it was written, and the words are changed with each incarnations, much like a game of telephone. Thus, nobody can really be sure of these things.

They are quotes to balance the all-good and peace side of Allah. They are only thinking that because those people are paying much more attention to the fire and brimstone part of the Quran when they are planning the suicide bombing and the malice and such.

Actually, I spoke there with the knowledge that the bombers were told where to go, and then just aimed for the most population concentration. That's where the bomber's recklessness and indecision comes in, not in the pre-planning.

Yes, I know that they aren't allowed to do so in this current state. However, if they were so entwined with their religion that their family is so close to God, why don't they all go under the 'protection' of Allah? If they are so oppressed, why does money or age matter? There are still rich families in Palestine, and though people from both upper and lower classes become bombers, it seems that those restrictions bely their conviction.

Of course. That still doesn't make it viable or justifiable.

If they have trouble directing limbs up stairs, how would they perform the complex maintenance? This is also an amusing situation, since this remote simulation dealy is very much similar to games themselves in terms of interface and such.

I know how modular goes, but how would you do it in the middle of the field? Shoot a wing into the air for the drone to 'catch' and 'attach'?

And thus using up even more energy? To extract such elements and combine them into usable components is harder than you think, even with perfect atomic manipulation.

And they convert the food into energy into drugs? Okay...

Nanobots that can reproduce and convert any material into viable energy, as well as 'hover' or move, and that can follow general objectives as well, doesn't come cheap. Data is usually backed up, and can be saved in the case of an EMP. And either the way, the nanobots are going to ruin the factory - or even commandeer it for the opposition, so there's no real reason not to EMP given the objective of the nanobots.

To **** up the enemy, you can't really keep it low cost. And if you keep it low cost, it can't really go beyong simple mechanical labor. A difficult decision, no? But nanobots can easily become weapons against personnel - EMPs aren't made to fly around every other second.

It was basically a 'prediction' novel about rogue reproducing nanobot swarms with AI which eventually learned basic predator instincts from learning in the desert, and a research lab right in the middle of that desert which is stranded from more or less all communication. An interesting look into nanotechnology, to say the least.

 

Don't ask me, but obviously the brain=washing works. You can't expect a religious fanatic to be rational.

Go read the Quran. "The Jews are the greediest people on Earth", it says.

It's a goal, yes, but the ways to achieve that peace differ depending on the fanaticism of who you ask.

Sadly it only makes me consider them savages for attacking civilians. I'm not going to sympathize with them just because they're following their religious beliefs.

You know that these are people who would prefer divine blessing over money, right? The money is just icing on the cake.

The whole thing dictates their way of life, totally and completely.

Well, that's debatable. Neither of us have lived there for any great length of time so we can't outright say whether or not the majority were progressive before the occupation; however to go from "I am tolerant of other viewpoints and religions" to "I am going to kill schoolchildren" is quite a leap so I doubt they were progressive. Perhaps very barely moderate.

...That's exactly the point. You'll notice they also have a "good stuff" section.

The true meaning of what? Quotes like these?
"Jews are the greediest of all humankind."
"Don't believe anyone who is not a Muslim."
"Have no unbelieving friends. Kill the unbelievers wherever you find them."

Please. It's pretty straight-forward to me, especially when a certain moderate Muslim member of this board is prejudiced against the jews solely due to religious reasons (when asked WHY and if they had ever really had a bad run in with one, they admitted not but felt they were right anyway).

Again: Islam is not inherently peaceful if it contains verses like that, much like Christianity and Judaism. That much is certain. Buddhism is inherently peaceful, since it never instructs in any way killing and the like. (that doesn't mean there aren't buddhists who are not peaceful; it means that by default even the most literal interpretations of their books are peaceful)

You know they prefer that the Quran never be translated to "maintain purity", right? It doesn't have as many translations as the Bible. Besides, you can't attribute every single bad quote on that site to a translation flub.

You know I'm referring to what suicide bombers think, right? Not all muslims? A suicide bomber is going to recite "kill all unbelievers"; a progressive is going to recite "Don't kill other Muslims." (both quotes are from the Quran)

...So because that little tidbit is up to them they are reckless and indecisive? That's like calling the attack on Omaha Beach on D-Day reckless and indecisive because soldiers got frightened and some hesitated.

Because then their population would drop like a rock, of course. And theres probably a restriction on women fighting (hell, in some areas they only JUST got to drive or operate businesses!)

Age: Well, kids are prone to making mistakes for one. Two, adults are more physical capable and not quite as fear prone. Three, theres probably a ban on kids fighting in the quran or something (though that hasn't stopped some regimes from using kids or wanting to do so)

Money: SOMEONE has to support the families, especially since women are not exactly looked upon kindly (think they can operate a business? Think again)

...You know I haven't exactly called using religion to incite war as justifiable, ever... in fact by now everyone in the debate forum should durn well know my stance on religion.

...What are you talking about? On the ground -people- would do maintenance, in the air it's never done. Do you think theres a technician sitting in the airplane while it flies to make sure nothing goes wrong?

Well obviously there'd be backup programming in case the comm link is severed complete with enemy aircraft sihlouettes and other necessities. How that didn't occur to you, I don't know.

...uh, no? Have it land at an airbase/carrier, detach the wing, and put a new one on. Pretty common sense stuff to me. Aircraft can fly with damaged components and even if it was severely damaged the drone could eject the damaged component and if necessary initiate emergency landing procedures.

*sigh* Pay attention. I said these nanobots would utilise ATP energy from the human body. It's a viable energy source, and since these bots are floating around inside the body, hardly scarce.

No. Have the body produce the energy you need. Manipulate what you need into the simple drug. If your goal is indeed to kill the enemy, begin to clog arteries (or damage things).

Never said anything about converting material into energy. More like leeching off the human body, which has been shown to work.

They flow with the bloodstream. Where you got hovering from I don't know.

A simple program like

"Start
Make (formula)
If (time) = (24 hours)
then Shut Down
End If"

*continued next post*

 

You know a hard drive doesn't play nice with a refrigerator magnet, let alone an EMP burst, right?

Assuming they realised they were there on time.

Meh, there are cheaper anti-personnel methods that don't shut down after a burst from a flame thrower.

To be honest I prefer Ray Kurzweils The Age of Spiritual Machines. While I still find his theories on nanotech to be a tad fantastic, the rest seems fairly solid.

 

wasnt this topic about Civilization and evil?

 

True, but if their beliefs are indeed the result of brainwashing, using all the troubles of the land as excuses to get at the means, how could one actually refer to it as a sane movement? If they are actually successfully made to look at the violent insurrectionist phrases rather than anything else, are they actually looking at the whole thing?

Heh. I guess that, if they actually said that straightforwardly, I can't argue against those direct declarations.

But I'm pretty sure that most opinions for achieving peace are, you know, based on peaceful ways, rather than 'destroy all people.'

But others do. And either way, it still gives them an excuse to step back to if they actually do start being questioned. Such religious cleansings such as the Crusades and the Inquisition have been backed by religion and proceeded on to their course - why couldn't the Palestinians use the Israeli oppression as a reason to enact 'jihad'?

Of course. But in here, when most or all of the population are plagued by poverty and the lack of a way to make a living, money is also an important factor. Many people still perform abominable acts to gain the ability to buy food for the family, and to generally upkeep the family's well-being, and acts such as murder aren't out of question here.

It dictates their lives, but not their political decisions. If they followed all of their religion's beliefs and went hostile against the Israeli despite their disadvantage, they would likely be a smoking crater by now.

Yes, that is probably a progressive development, ever since the Israel/Palestine issue began, which was quite a time ago. Yes, neither of us have experienced life there, except in imaginations that are garnered from stories and news articles.

Yes, but being a skeptic with a 'good stuff' section only gives a point to prove that they aren't just bashing the bible, and are actually giving some space for compliments and such.

Of course, these quotes don't make up the whole Quran. People usually refer to them just to bestow justice to their hostile actions against others. What about other parts of Quran? You know, the sections that doesn't promote fire and brimstone, and the ousting and murdering of non-believers? The Quran has a lot of contradictions, as I have seen.

I'm not going to comment here, because I don't know of said moderate Muslim member and am not interested in how he or she acts because of that influence.

I never said it was inherently peaceful - just that it was intended to be pe;aceful, as perceived by early believers, using the hostile comments for reasons for carrying out judgment and so on.

No, I can't, but I can attribute many of them to a biased view towards the violent side. Like I stated oh so no long ago, there is no truly neutral way to perceive any given object.

I know. A suicide bomber wouldn't be a good bomber if he went in thinking moderate and such. He went in with the intent to kill, not to question his motives. The 20 days of lecturing that he has received were done to shape the bomber to the zealous 'executioner'.

I never called the procedure of suicide bombing 'reckless and indecisive'. That phrase was used to describe the motives of the bomber himself before he decides to blow himself to kingdom come.

Their population is already dropping on their missions against the 'enemy' with bombers and militant groups - and they continue to proceed. Since they are sending off anyone able to do it, I doubt they are caring much about how many people there are in the family, only, perhaps, caring about the social welfare of the remaining.

No matter what mistakes a kid makes, once he's send into the zone he can probably cause collateral damage one way or another, even if he chose to blow himself in a less populated place by a mistake. As you said, many regimes actually do use children as a part of their 'military', and many others do want to do so.

The logic that I would think that they would use is that 'if there is no family to support, who cares?'

Of course.

There is emergency maintenance done by many fighter pilots - manipulations of components to not use them in fear of overloading and such. Parts don't become actively repaired in the air, yes, but manipulation to prevent explosions are done often.

If you are having humans 'pilot' the things remotely, and the communication link is severed, do you propose that they'll suddenly gain a friend-or-foe system and actually act from that?

I don't know about the efficiency of modularity in those drones. They are drones, after all, and if they are meant to cost as little as you think they do, I believe it would be more efficient to utilize these parts to create a new drone rather than attempting to repair a damaged and perhaps malfunctioning drone.

So you have the nanobots drain the ATP from the human while reproducing in the process? Why would you even need the drugs then? Wouldn't such an action already present several formidable dangers to the victim?

 

Or just simply reproduce until the total volume blocks something by itself or ruptures. With energy enough to manage reproduction, you don't need commands for the bots to find an artery and such.

Right. I perceived your idea with this scenario as well - how would the nanobots act out of the body, still in the food supply?

That'll just have it be active for 24 hours. What will be the code for reproduction, the leeching of the ATP, the creation of the other 'drugs', the control of fuel use, and so forth?

The hard drive doesn't have to be in the factory. Backup data are usually put in another building in another hard drive, in a disguised place, and not be hit by the EMP. It IS military data, and just having it lie around in the war factory isn't by any means wise.

If they came early, they'd have to utilize full EMP to not risk leaving even one of them active, and if they came late, they have no reason not to use EMP.

But nanobots aren't easily detected once into the human's body, and it is doubtful that one would enact a flamethrower on a living body to get rid of nanobots inside - it probably won't be that effective, actually.

Haven't read it, so eh.

 

Ok, maybe I should reiterate: Lay dormat in the food supply. Be consumed. Activate inside the body (either via a timed system or exposure to a chemical in the body or something? Not sure on the specifics; irrelevant at this point). Carry out program.

And make the drug.

Ok, I missed that, my mistake. Add in a code to make 2 more bots before shut down then.

That would probably be hard coded into it if it wasn't a passive method.

Note that I had code in their for drugs.

Done in the hardware. Why have things hard coded? Just in case theres a hacker or jammer of some sort.

Oh, forgive me for not writing a detailed program accounting for every variable for a fictional robot. Perhaps you'd like me to draw up schematics of engineer level quality for a starship in one of my stories as well? Real programmers would have more than a couple minutes to write the program, don't be silly.

You know how much electrical equipment is in a factory anyway, right? And how expensive it can get, right? Ever worked in a factory?

Cost?

Assuming you're stupid enough to let them get in in the first place. As a security measure, nanobots suck. A simply flamethrower burst into a hallway would clear em out before they could reach you.

Well I haven't readthe book you mentioned either, so now we're even.

 

It's religion. Why are you expecting a fair, rational, balanced view of the world?

Please go read the Old Testament and Revelations.

They may as well with the crap they're pulling. Doesn't make it any more right.

While true, there are other things they can do to make money that don't involve killing yourself.

You mean like when Egypt decided to attack Israel on a religious holiday? Or when people vote a certain way in America because that person has the same religion?

If they went openly hostile face first then yes, but that would just be stupid.

...Then why the complaint? If they're simply showing the truth, both the good and bad, then that doesn't exactly work against them.

Y'know, I've said it many times in this debate, but it all depends on how they read it. I know the Quran is not all like that; however there is more than sufficient amounts of that sort of thing to provide fuel for bombers. I'm not trying to be insulting in saying that Islam is inherently peaceful. I'm being truthful. If a book says "go kill unbelievers" it is NOT peaceful!

You went on about the religion of peace claptrap for a while. Perhaps there was a misunderstanding but meh.

...How can they be biased when they simply went through and extracted every single quote thats good or bad? That's not biased, thats just simple truth, cold and unpleasant.

Given that he just spent, what was it, 20 days thinking about it? Thats not really indecisive, I think by that point he's pretty commited and sure of what he's gonna do.

If you think the numbers drop now, imagine what would happen if the women all died too.

Frankly I'd rather have clean cut surgical strikes than idiots bumbling about.

Yeah, but it obviously can't be too complex in terms of manipulation. Yes there are minute adjustments made but nothing that couldn't be handled by an AI.

You know how sihlouette systems work, right? If its hard coded into them there isn't much you can do to change that short of actually changing the hardware.

Modularity lends itself to adaptation for different missions. Sensor modules; missile racks; whatever is needed.

Not if the ATP energy usage was very efficient (which if its going to be in a body it has to be, especially since we want to use them in ourselves for medical purposes). As far as reproduction goes, the objective was not to kill the civvies, remember? But if y'wanted them to kill...

 

I'm not expecting one. I'm theorizing one, as I did in the first post in the discussion - the true neutral, the something that's lacking from the universe. I'm just looking at it from the view of an indifferent.

Most, not all.

That's what they are doing right now, to an extent. And it still wouldn't change the views, I agree. But, they are more or less declaring 'jihad' with their bombings. Just need to make it more focused and such.

And if those 'other things' are out of reach because of a lack of proficiency, a prejudiced view (on both sides), or simply doesn't make enough money? Many of the lower-class are probably doing this for the money. The higher-class, the rich, you may argue are acting as figureheads for the others to rally to, as bombers.

One is taking advantage of religious positions for an attack that has both surprise and debilitation effects, and the second's a usual leader-follower situation.

Oh yes, but Allah wouldn't want them to cower like cowards and hit only when the back is turned, would he?

The fact that they are showing the truth may be argued, since everyone is biased one way or another, and I was stating that the 'good stuff' was just to make sure that they didn't only bash the object, and thus lose credibility as an opposing party.

I never stated that it is inherently peaceful. I stated that it could, and in the views of many, should be referred to be as a peaceful document. I never said it wasn't violent as well. But right now, it is only made to look violent because of the recent actions.

Yes, the quotes themselves are the truth, non-modified. But the categories and the symbols that they have been classified under - those classifications may be biased, you never know. There could be a missing line that should have belonged somewhere, some other line that wasn't mentioned, and so forth.

Yes, I know that the bomber would know by then that he's going to blow himself to shrapnel. But religious teachings doesn't direct him to where or when he should set off the bomb, which is a very important part of the procedure.

Of course, eventually they'll be running out of viable bombers, and who knows what'll happen then?

So would we all. However, there is a distinct lack in experience tacticians to actually lead those clean-cut surgical strikes in their military branch, and sometimes the desperate is done.

Indeed, but it has to be done nevertheless, and is yet another duty for the AI to attend to.

Yet another thing to do, I suppose, but that works.

Yes, but why not mass produce some other drones for those purposes? Though I admit that customization is good, these are small drones with probably short lifespans, not giant robots that needs to utilize customization to improve and adapt to further challenges.

Well, the nanobots would rarely actually release the drugs all at once - and if they did, it would more likely be missing some of the personnel. If they don't release the drugs at once, people'll start noticing once the first couple of nano-infected people slumps down like bricks.

 

I was mostly skeptical about the trigger of their rise from dormancy, actually.

Right. Make (formula), I thought, was something irrelevant.

Make two more bots from the nutrients in the body? This repeating process would probably kill more than the drug would stun.

Still foiled by a controlled EMP blast, then?

See a couple of quotes above.

Why would a hacker/jammer bother with millions of nanobots, unless the other option was to remote-link the orders, which would be unwise either way?

Oh, I don't expect you to. But there should be explanations of effective ways to do so, not that I actually requested the real code.

It is still better to disable electronic equipment than have nanobots aid in subjugating the equipment for enemy use. After all, after they found out the motive for the 'druggies', why would they want to leave their information wide open for the releasers?

See up.

Nanobots, once spread apart, are almost impossible to spot, and can traverse through almost any regular material by finding holes in the walls or making those nigh-invisible holes themselves. That's the point of it, after all.

Shrug.

 

Stay truly neutral and you'll never understand any concept which isn't logical.

Since we're discussing religion, and Abrahamic religion at that, it's clear that in this case most does not apply to peaceful methods of obtaining peace.

If it were that clear cut and simplistic, I might agree, but money can only do so much. If it was that easy, we'd have suicide bombers right here in North America composed of hobos and other unfortunates. Against what? Big businesses; police; anything that makes a convenient target which the rabble hate. However, the reason we do not have this problem is that these people are not raised in an environment which never glorifies killing women and children and has an exceptionally lower rate of glorifying suicide attackers (only recent examples I can think of are that fellow from ID4 who kamikazied and from what I hear passengers who went after hijackers). You wouldn't get these suicide bombers without the culture that makes it glorious and good to begin with.

Ah - stop right there. Notice the leader-follower situation? Now, imagine an entire country filled with people like that.

"How many a township have We destroyed! As a raid by night, or while they slept at noon, Our terror came unto them."
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/7/index.html#4
Apparently cowardice is a-ok.

If you want to go through it and verify every single quote for yourself, and see that yes indeed they are simply pulling out significant quotes as they find them, go ahead.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/science/long.html
You can't tell me that this is bashing it. Perhaps if they said "these people are evil and vicious" or continued to make insulting comments after quotes, they would be bashing, but simply showing a quote and labelling it for what it is (be it scientific inaccuracy, intolerance or cruelty) is not bashing.

Certain parts, yes, not unlike the Bible, but in actuality neither the Quran and the Bible are anywhere near peaceful unless you remove vast sections.

But the Quran is violent.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Creationism/Essays/Opportunism.shtml

Given that every verse has a link so you can view it in context, you really have no excuse for "never knowing".

It doesn't have to. It says kill unbelievers where-ever you find them.

Wait for the kids to grow up.

Yes but the point is an adult is going to be a bit cleaner with his cuts than a kid. Children are easily gripped by fear and desperation; at least in my experience adults are more jaded and better equipped to deal with stress. (obviously there are exceptions to this rule)

Given the speed of a computer vs a human brain, it isn't that difficult. A human takes, what, a half second to respond to something assuming theres nothing inhibiting his reaction time (be it fatigue or having to focus on combat). Yet a machine is essentially "aware" of the problem in much less time and can begin work on it immeadiately.

Well, I think giant robots have no place in the military EVER, but staying on (massively deviated) topic, if you believe that these drones are going to have short lifespans anyway, why did you even bring up repairs to begin with?

 

Not really. A nanobot is 1/10th the size of a human cell so it doesn't consume that many resources to build one. Or if it could reprogram a cell to produce this drug... ah well.

Assuming that it's not a passive method as long as its in the body, yes, but wouldn't EMPing civilian populations be a bit of a nuisance? I like how you mention this "controlled" EMP blast.

Simplistic code; possibly with the ability to rewrite for beneficial purposes.

Well as far as fuel use goes, I already said it'd be minimal since it could simply hitch a ride in the bloodstream; if it really needed to get somewhere, build them with flagella not unlike a bacteria.

Oh I know, but it's still a massive pain in the *** to have to go in and rework or even replace all of the factory robots and computer systems.

And could you imagine how aggravating it would be if you had one of these
http://taipeitimes.com/images/2003/07/12/20030711162522.jpeg
nearly finished? They take a fair chunk of time to build, and frying all of its electronics would mean either stripping it all back down and replacing thousands of components or simply scrapping that fighter.

Well, I know we've cost the enemy a war factory, its products, and an EMP warhead. Pretty nice score as far as I'm concerned.

Yes but they aren't going to be terribly fast, especially outside a body, and a simple quarter second blast of flame is going to utterly screw them.

 

Stay truly neutral, and logic is no longer a barrier for thoughts. But, fine, I'll drop the neutralism concept.

True, many religions of that sort were used as a reason to kill and to war, but there is a reason that war isn't sprouting all over the world today because of religion, if cults are.

Yes, I do admit that suicide bombing had a push from religious motivation, but that is indeed from them being taught all their lives, a belief different from thsoe of others. But, with this oppression going on and the people wanting to strike back, I believe that there would still be Palestinian suicide bombers even if religious motivation didn't play as much of a hand in it. Religion is not the only fuel for those decision - the well-being of the family, malice against the Israeli oppression, and anger at the inactivity or biase shown by the Americans provide much fuel for these bombs.

Of course. Most, if not all people, are either a leader or a follower. One could almost say that this world was filled with people like that.

That was to smoke out disbelievers to condemn them, and this is in a middle of a losing war. But meh.

Everyone can just be pulling out particularly strong quotes from a document, and it is almost impossible to tell if they are pulling them out or if they are actually perceiving them before using them.

In a way, classifying quotes under intolerance, cruelty, absurdities, and so on are an obvious offense to those who live by the quran and such. Not everyone views those quotes as intolerance and cruelty, for one - though scientific inaccuracy can't be helped - it was comparing beliefs against facts, after all. And I didn't say that they were actually bashing it. I'm saying that, if they didn't include sections such as Good Stuff, they would be seen as only bashing the Quran, and thus lose credibility.

But the Bible is still viewed as a fairly peaceful document these days for so many people to 'save themselves' with it. After all, you don't see everybody going around declaring wars on the words of fire and brimstone in the bible. Now, why can't that be possible for the Quran, despite the apparantly larger ratio to violence : peace?

So is the Bible, but do people admit that?

Yes, all of those religions, as said before, was conceived to bring support under the swing of a blade. But there are modified versions of Islam that exist today that swing toward peace, such as there are similar versions for the Bible.

Not every verse - more like the classified verses. There are still others that aren't classified anywhere because they either can't be classified or aren't being classified.

Yet bombers still look for the largest concentration of people before doing so. After all, the tactical planners wouldn't want bombers go in and blow themselves up to only kill two or three people rather than a stunning 20.

I'm pretty sure that they'll eventually run out, because the kids growing up period takes a lot longer than suicide bomber making period.

Adult can still be gripped by fear and desperation - the articles from before say that the suicide bomber is partly driven by desperation, after all. Yes, adults are more jaded on this, but they also have much more responsibility that they are throwing away in doing this, that may incur more misgivings.

But, remember, to save space, all mechanical shortcuts, such as levers and buttons, would probably be ousted. Thus, the computer would have to concentrate on movnig all of the components directly rather than flipping a switch and concentrating on other things. This may result in many simutaneous active functions that, together with the remote signal comprehension of flight functions and shooting, could slow it down.

Small maintenances would lengthen the lifespans enough so that the benefit becomes a lot larger than the cost. A simple maintenance system that manages fuel leaks and such can keep a drone alive a lot longer than a drone without one. Modular components, however, rely on the drone staying alive through missions, and would probably prove to be a waste.

 

So we are turning a nanobot into a virus when one can probably just utilize biochemical warfare and release the virus in the first place? And yes, though it is the size of a human cell, it still has to draw upon metallic elements to actually make the bot.

It would be a nuisance, but it would be rid of a plague. And controlled EMP is likely possible, if not in the form of a pulse then in a beam or some other similar form.

I re-iterate, millions of nanobots. Not easy to modify them all - and if they are controlled by a hive mind, so to speak, I doubt that the hive mind code would be amongst them.

The movement of flagella would just incur more fuel use, and the reproduction and production of the drugs themselves still require fuel. Energy isn't used only for movement.

Better that the subjugators have to do that if the nanobots are victorious, and still better than losing the factory that one has to rework the components... unless, of course, the attacks are continuous.

Can you imagine how aggravating it would be if you had one of these stolen from you and finished, then used against you instead?

Considering that you could have had that war factory, its products, and that EMP warhead, it's more or less the lower end of the stick.

Sure, but that depends on if the presence of the nanobots are actually detected. People aren't going to whip around flamethrowers all day on something they don't know is there.

 

Well, at least in the Americas and Europe (and Russia) there aren't really religions wars at all, mostly due to the vast vast VAST drop of fanatic religion followers.

Well, I (repeatedly) conceded that cash did play a role (but was not the only one and not the major one), so we're pretty much done with this part of the discussion.

Ah, so cowardice is ok even when they are winning. Sweet deal.

Given that you can view the quote in context, this is a nonissue.

I'm sorry if I happen to offend their delicate sensibilities, but as far as I'm concerned, edicts to kill people who don't have the same beliefs IS cruel.

Only if they ignore certain parts and proclaim very large chunks of it to be metaphorical or not to be taken literally.

But we do see people blaming 9/11 on gays.

It is possible; however like the bible there are people who refuse to ignore large parts of it. I never said it wasn't possible; however I did say that taken as a whole it is NOT a peaceful book.

'course not, which is why I get nervous around zealous followers of EITHER book.

Why you're telling me this when I repeated (over and over) that there are moderate and progressive muslims is beyond me.

What would please a bloodthirsty god more - 3 of his enemies killed, or 20?

Well I know that, however they are somewhat less susceptible.

Except that those responsibilities don't exist that much given that you can't be married or have kids and you can't be the sole breadwinner of a family. Whats he going to do, grieve over leaving 1/4 tank of gas in his car unused?

...Uh, hold on. Do modern aircraft computers "concentrate" on moving all those parts? Why wouldn't the AI simply flip a "digital" switch?

Keep in mind as far as modularity goes I'm referring to constant action, as in the drone having 5 minutes to refuel, rearm and repair. If it had the time, sure, repair it normally.

 

Antibiotics and immune systems can fight a virus.

Alteration of atomic structures/absorption from food?

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/5971/emp.html
I don't think a beam is really possible.

Then jam the hive mind signal.

With said fuel being the humans ATP.

Mmm mmm good ATP.

I know, thats what makes it so damn annoying.

*cough* Remember that scene in Saving Private Ryan when they open the door to the bunker, and before even going in douse its innards liberally with flamethrower fire?

 

No, there aren't religious wars. There are political wars, incurred by politicans. Now, we can't really drop the number of politicians that we have, now can we?

Sure.

Guess so, eh?

Eh, perhaps.

I'll just go back to my first point long long ago for this. It is cruel in some views, simple judgment in others, and serving Allah/following the word of Quran for even some others. You never know. If it is actually believed to be cruel universally, I doubt that the Quran'll be as widely trusted in.

Many Muslims do this with the Quran too, else they would ALL be fanatical fighters. They are not.

We also see people blaming 9/11 on just about everything.

I never said it was as a whole peaceful. I stated that it could be viewed as peaceful - the suicide bombers using parts of the book obviously deviates it from true peacefulness. Then again, since there are now variants of Islam, who knows which variant is being referred to?

I just stay away, but whatever works.

Actually, you only directly stated their existance once, and used that fact to bolster ideas. But it's only the hammer the concept in.

What would please a bloodthirsty god more - 20 of his enemy killed, or seeking more than 20 yet getting caught in the process, resulting in the casualty of none but the bomber and maybe 2 or 3 bystanders?

They are however also more often a target of suspicion, especially with the added bumps and such with the bombs covered by a convenient trenchcoat. This gives them an additonal factor of fear. Children are less often atarget of suspicion than adults.

One breadwinner isn't always enough, and if the second is selected he may worry about the family if one is not enough. Also, throwing away family members for suicidal glory is no small act. The bomber would also grieve over his family, of course. Financial troubles aren't the only thing a brother would care about.

Wouldn't that same AI have to still supervise the procedure started by the 'digital' switch?

If you were referring to a carrier and such, wouldn't you lose a lot of resources if they blew the carrier? The point of mechanism is to not need a chain of command and communication, or at least, not on the front lines. If you were to give them a restock station to depend on for continued battling, it would come out as quite the obvious weak point.

 

Cells can't attack nanobots?

Still a complicated thing to do, to be able to use electron fields or some other method of manipulation to actually mold these structures into what is desirable.

Alright, so a concentrated beam isn't really possible, though the concept of a 'EMP gun' has been flying around for a while now. Either way, EMP can probably be controlled anyway, as EMP shielding exist pretty regularly. Setting off the EMP inside the shielding could probably work - or, perhaps, on the wider scale, just cover your important machines with the shielding and let 'er rip.

And if they had their individual but identical programming?

Draining human ATP would probably do more damage, as I said, than the drugs will.

...in which case one either 1) doesn't even bother to repair the electronics again after the second time or 2) employ EMP shielding.

Between a rock and a hard place, indeed.

They aren't going to do that everywhere. Flamethrowers can also harm your own components in a factory, yannow.

 

I used to worry about nanobots. I used to be scared by the scenarios of Kurzweil's book. But then I realized that the planet's oil is half gone, with consumption continually increasing. Give us a few years and we will be struggling to find food to eat, forget about making complicated machines. Nanobots will never happen, industry will collapse first.

In a way this is a relief: humanity will survive and not be wiped out by grey goo, but I don't think I can really look forward to a life on the farm, with every waking moment devoted to finding nourishment. Assuming I survive the collapse of industrial civilization of course.

I see industrial civilization as a bit of a race to see which will happen first: humanity's destruction via intelligent machines, or a self inflicted collape resulting from a relentless usage of non renewable resources. Whichever happens, we lose. In that sense, our civilization is somewhat evil. Of course people will want to debate whether evil has any meaning at all, which I think is a waste of time. At least in a few years they won't have the time to do it, or any one to do it with. Yeah, great.

Neph, VR, continue.