[dzink]

State actors already have the weapons, so it is not complicated to attach those to a tool capable of ferrying them over rugged terrain, with long battery life, and into hiding places of human opponends. Just as they attached them to drones, cars, and other gear. What guarantees that the biggest use cases and the most motivated users of this technology are not deadly? Maybe license?

[jcims]

State actors aren't the threat to worry about here. They have much more controlled and reliable ways of killing you and if they decide to weaponize a mobile platform like this they are likely to fund or steal much more purpose-built technology.

If you're worried about weaponization of open source projects, your threat actors are just about any person with a computer, a couple thousand dollars and a grudge.

[zaai]

Yep, already happening.

Boston Dynamics robot with gun: Quote: "At the Association of the US Army’s annual conference last week, Ghost Robotics unveiled its Vision 60 quadrupedal robot, which wielded a custom-made gun atop its already eerie figure."

https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/328299-robot-dogs-now-fi...

[freemint]

Yeah but non state actors don't. Just imagine dropping of robots with a gun from a car or send them via package. A 360 camera and a gun is a scary combination and as long as you use them in a suicide manner it doesn't even need to recognize friendly combatants or spare children. Just shoot everything that's bigger than rat and moves until the magazine is empty while moving patrolling the streets.

[blacksmith_tb]

I am skeptical that licensing could stop someone from using a project as the basis for a weapon - I doubt lawsuits would seem like much of a deterrent.

That said, I am not sure that a quadruped robot is much better for delivering a bomb than an RC car, other than a slight edge on rough terrain. Both would have an advantage over flying, since weight is a problem for drones.