The aircraft flew up to speeds of 1,200mph. DARPA did not reveal which aircraft won the dogfight.

  • GBU_28@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Plus the ai has no risk, outside of basic operation.

    Humans have an inherent survival instinct to which drones can just say “lol send the next one I’m dying cya”

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 months ago

      To fight optimally, AI needs to have a survival instinct too.

      Evolution didn’t settle on “protect my life at all costs” as our default instinct, simply by chance. It did so because it’s the best strategy in a hostile environment.

      • maynarkh@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 months ago

        It’s the best strategy because it takes decades to make a fully functional human, and you need humans to make more humans, plus there is the issue of genetically sustainable population sizes, etc. A fully functional aeroplane can be made much quicker, in a factory that can spit out several of them in a day. They are more expendable.

      • Turun@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 months ago

        Only if the goal is reproduction. You need to survive to reproduce.

        If the goal is maximum damage for the least amount of economic cost then a suicide (anthropomorphizing the drone here) can very much make sense.

        No one would argue that a sword is better than guns or bombs, because you still have the sword after attacking.

    • Aatube@kbin.melroy.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Jets are a lot more expensive. What’s at risk is all these resources for the jet going down the drain.

      • GBU_28@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Huh? Jets are far more replaceable than a human operator who takes years of training and has “needs”.

        Ya know unless your military is running on cold war fumes or something and you can’t afford to build an airframe you already have in production

        • diffusive@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          2 months ago

          Training a combat pilot used to cost (in early 2000, not sure now) 10M€ for a NATO member.

          Find me a modern jet that costs so little. Regardless of what politicians say, human life has a price… and it is waaaay below a jet (even including the training)

          • grue@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            2 months ago

            Yeah, but procurement of a combat pilot has about a two-decade lead time. You can build more jets a lot quicker (potentially even including the R&D phase).

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 months ago

              Also as this war expands to become planet-wide, industrial output of drones will expand many orders of magnitude.

          • GBU_28@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            edit-2
            2 months ago

            It’s not just money. It’s time, public perception, quantity trainers, quantity student seats etc

            A drone is ready the moment it comes off the assembly line, is flashed with software, and tested.

      • everyone_said@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’d imagine they’d evetually design a jet purpose built for an AI that would be a lot cheaper than a human-oriented one. Removing the need for a cockpit with seats, displays, controls, oxygen, etc would surely reduce cost. It would also open the door for innovations in air-frame design previously impossible.

      • Bgugi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Jets are in many ways expensive because they can’t be expendible. They also make an bunch of compromises to accommodate keeping a human alive.

        For the cost of a single f22, you could put up 60 Valkyries. I think I know which side I would bet on.