[nickthemagicman]

> And so we'll end up fighting battles mostly by destroying drones instead of people.

This is one piece of possibly good news that it seems like everyone is overlooking.

Automation/Remote control applies not just to drones, but tanks, boats, other aerial vehicles, and maybe troops(after seeing that Boston Dynamics dog robot) etc. Seems like it will be a small squad of highly advanced human troops to move in after the Remotes to secure and maintain control of the area.

So many lives will be spared during wars.

However, this may be unbeatable tech by humans, so any future revolutions will be easily quelled by a gov't with a few drone pilots piloting a drone swarm in a room a thousand miles away.

[throwaway316943]

More likely it will cause a greater loss of life while invalidating previous military tactics. These weapons are more similar to land mines than guided missiles. They’ll be used primarily against troops and armour but also stationary targets like radar, command posts, barracks, depots, and in a bigger war probably against civilian targets. You could drop hundreds of these from a bomber or dozens from a large truck that an insurgent can park close to the target but outside the secured area or a single terrorist could deploy a single drone at a high value target. I’m hoping anti drone technology turns out to be easier and cheaper otherwise we’re seriously screwed.

[marcus_holmes]

I agree. This isn't all bad :) Like the move from conscript peasant armies to volunteer professional armies, leave the rest of us out of it.

It'll come down to "how many drones, and of what quality, can your manufacturing base produce?". But this is not that dissimilar from WW2's "how many tanks, and of what quality, can you manufacture?" equation.

Insurgencies will be about getting a small swarm in exactly the right place at the right time.