[lmm]

The logistics of keeping them fed and watered, having trained handlers, and treating them for injuries are nontrivial. And they're prone to unhelpful reactions in a firefight. There are good reasons they've largely been displaced by motor vehicles. Combining the go-anywhere ability of legged propulsion with the advantages of motor transport seems like a good enough idea to merit study.

[JabavuAdams]

Much easier than the logistics of keeping a robot operational in the field. You don't care whether the Taliban captures your flesh and blood mule, but you really don't want them capturing your world's-most-advanced robotic mule.

[kiba]

The Taliban are not going to have the capability to reverse engineer and produce their own copy, let along having the logistic capability of keeping it in the field.

[dredmorbius]

But the parties they sell it to, for substantial combat-enabling cash, will.

[orf]

I'm sure they could find a buyer for it that can.

[jonmrodriguez]

Is it common for military electronics to have a self-destruct feature to protect technology secrets?

E.g., when damaged beyond repair or abandoned in a hasty retreat, the hardware could ignite a little thermite to incinerate the electronics boards.

[nitrogen]

One of the stealth helicopters used in the assassination of bin Laden was so destroyed, but a part of the tail was left behind.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Osama_bin_Laden#Helic...

[Gracana]

I used to have some old (tube-based) test equipment that included instructions on exploding it with a grenade in the event that it had to be left behind. The grenade was not built in, however.

[grogenaut]

Why? What are they going to do with it?

[Someone]

Sell it to a country that has the technology level needed to copy it. Russia and China likely would be interested; they might not want to do business with the Taliban directly, but might be willing to buy them through a middle man, say Pakistan.

It is fairly common for countries to let other powers take a look at technology that lands in their hands (sometimes before returning it to them). See for example https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viktor_Belenko#Aftermath

[rtkwe]

A lot of the ability of the Boston Robotics robots is in their software thought which is much easier to lockdown via encryption. The rest is the hydraulic mechanism which is not easy but is the best known part of what the BR robots do.

[marktangotango]

Concealing algorithms and executable code is actually very difficult, consider that to run, a program must first be decrypted. Also consider the decades long war between crackers and proprietary software creators. Obfuscating algorithms has been the subject of quite a lot of academic research.

[rtkwe]

Store the decryption key in a removable module or the wireless controller? Then anyone who captures one is stuck with a ball of encrypted code that can't execute. Dealing with securing software and keys against capture is not new for the military.

Also destroying the hdd/ssd is easier than destroying the whole machine. You could even have a secure wipe option if the machine is still able to run it's computer but is disabled mechanically.

[grogenaut]

I was thinking more along the lines of thermite

[grogenaut]

Sure and it's a problem the military has been dealing with for decades. I'm going to assume they understand the calculus and some effective countermeasures.

[91bananas]

Perhaps reverse engineer it, find someone that can reverse engineer it, exploit it or others like it, expose every detail about it all over the internet, a number of potentially harmful things?

[walshemj]

And training a muleteer takes a long time also non mechanised units require a lot more logistic support.

The USMC small wars manual has a lot on how to organise an non mechanized unit that was mostly horse /mule and ox drawn.