I really think we shouldn't make them.

Who knows? The technology can go into the wrong hands and our technology can go against us.

Does anyone have any opinions about this?

Newsflash: the military already uses robot technology, like smaller robots to disarm explosives at distance if I'm not mistaken. And there's going to be more.

Is it bad? No, not unless someone purposely programs the robot to be able to turn against your own troops (assuming the robot has any weapons). And in case something goes wrong, e.g. a bug, you just need to hope they weren't stupid enough to arm an autonomous robot with an A-bomb :D

it's a good and a bad thing.
let some robots fight. leave the people away. (thats good)
the battlefield will then change from people shooting guns to people behind a computer trying to hack into the enemy's robots. (thats bad)

Vulcan explains it rather well.

This isn't Hollywood; the chances of a robot becoming situationally aware on its own is slim to none. And even if it did, it would be programmed not to know the difference.

What if Russia and all the other superpowers create this technology (more advanced robots), and soon the terrorists get their hands on it? That is a bad sign to everyone. Look what happened in the Cold War!!

What if Russia and all the other superpowers create this technology (more advanced robots), and soon the terrorists get their hands on it? That is a bad sign to everyone.

only bad if you are the target of the terrorists.
and it depends on what those robots can and can't do.

Look what happened in the Cold War!!

not much really.

allot of talking and showing muscle.
but no fighting.

There were huge tensions in the Cold War. Only because they wanted to show off their hydrogen bombs and their new technology.

If there was a nuclear fight between them, Russia would've won.

If there was a biological fight, USA would win.

Of course they should. Efficiency is king. Why would you put and EOD technician or a sentry in a position of harm when a robot can do the job just as well in their stead?

If there was a nuclear fight between them, Russia would've won.

If there was a biological fight, USA would win.

wat

America had more nukes, more powerful nukes, and better ways to get them there.

Biological wut?

America had more nukes

Nope. At the height of the Cold War, Russia had plenty more. Whether or not they were operational or launch-ready is the real question.

funny you guys talk about winning.
there would be no winner in a nuclear winter of that scale.
and if you really want a winner. i guess the soviets had a better chance, just because they had/have way more land.

This thread is like asking: Should we save people's lives by putting a robot in the field, or should we ban something that could bring somebody's mom or dad back home?