Lol, security guards in SanFran want $20 an hour? Fine, here's they're replacements:
its legal until its not. Essentially expect new legislation to be ejaculated all over us to "protect mah investment" I will claim the head of robots when its possible, go fuck yourself overlords. put really people on the streets, cause im not putting up with fucking robots enforcing shit laws.
Never know when I might come up against heavy armor. Give me the GEP gun.
>"What you are doing is illegal. You will be apprehended under hillary's stop antisocial behaviour act of 2034."
>"You're breaking the law, but it's a shit law and taxpayer dollars could be spent on better things"
>If a person steps in front of the K5 robot, it will stop and move around the person, while sending a video to the control center
REMEMBER NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY IN PUBLIC THEY'RE HERE TO PROTECT YOU JUST MOVE ALONG
>Merely resemble a wanted criminal, missing person or sex offender
>Malldroids call the cops on you every single time
What a horrible future.
>BBC sues silicon valley for copyright infringement
You heard it here
>Lol, security guards in SanFran want $20 an hour? Fine, here's they're replacements:
>Implying these are more effective than security guards.
>Implying the technology is cheaper.
Please, be more stupid. My sides are not needed.
>The memory of strangers is effectively identical to a machine designed for survey and record.
I hope you realize you've just established that the quality of discussion for the rest of the thread will be very low.
I think we are more fucked than in RoboCop scenario.
Clearly we need Kougami and Tsunemori here.
For simple guard duties they can be use as telepresence drones.
Plus enforcer teams as reaction measure.
It's like in my Shadowrun RPG!
1. security guards don't get $20/hour
2. those things are shit because they sure as shit aren't going to be able to do anything during a home invasion/robbery
4. you realize that the company that makes these probably paid off the writers to hype their product for them right?
sage for idiocy
And you can't mount weapons on a robot. Or loudspeaker. No Sir, it's impossible.
Costs for employing humans in western part of world is skyrocketing unless you are ready to hire lame, sick or emigrants. Not everyone is interested in that or simply needs effective way of guarding property. And since you are upgrading to high grade surveillance systems anyway, why not make them mobile and more versatile? With enough production volume buying price plus upkeep will at some point be lower than hiring flesh and blood. It's matter of economy and as a bonus you don't have to fight with unions, regulations and all that useless law rules. Trully, a corporate heaven.
security jobs pay min wage with no benefits unless you work for the goverment
these things are just giant security cameras, why would I blow money on these when I can just get a few cameras? They're cheaper to run and replace anyway
what else would you used a hired cop for
the reason you get a gaurd is so that they can kick someone's ass if they cause problems
>And you can't mount weapons on a robot.
from a legal standpoint it is. You know how much you're going to have to pay to the ATF to make it legal? Lots, and it's only transferable to FFL holders. Then you have the problem where it's illegal for it to discharge the weapon at all and likely illegal to have it armed
You realize, they're all on Microsoft property, so by fucking with them you'd be tresspassing, and they're taking pictures of you the whole time...
they come from a VC whore inside silicon valley
in this world, people only travel via segways to their official office playrooms where they bro out between hardcore coding sessions on their brand new ipads
"stairs" as a concept cannot exist in this world because why have a staircase when you can have a golden elevator with yoga balls in it
>Any competent person/team robbing a place with security will obviously do their research.
that doesn't happen
the vast majority or robberies occur when underprivileged hispanic youths see a shiny office building built next to their section five homes and set off the alarms breaking in through a rollup door
in these instances, they don't care about a moving camera, especially when they know they can sell it to some merchant at their local flea market
I've seen it happen myself, got three stolen NASes for $40 off some beaner who didn't know what a NAS was, just that when it booted it gave him a command prompt he couldn't read. Same with iphones and other things like TVs.
>there is nothing like that by default
Then why do they even bother in the first place?
Granted these two completely different situations and surveillance/security laws supersede any such thing.
>Then why do they even bother in the first place?
Lawyers are happy to take money from people indulging in "principled" arguments. The lawyer should argue that they have no case on which to stand but the plaintiff would still push the case to court.
If someone doesn't like how they look/are portrayed in your film. They can sue you for a petty "rights violation" suit. That's why they get people to sign these away.
You're a dummy.
>Robot security guard
Let that sink in m8, it's a security camera on wheels - anything it films is security footage.
Your entire argument that this is unlawful is wrong.
You're the DUMMY here m8.
Hi UK, how are those cameras and tv licenses?
You get new silverware yet? Don't forget to bring your ID!
Make sure to be nice on the internet, or you're going to jail. Also be sure to thank Allah before you go to bed.
>UK police can't murder people with no repercussions at all or be detained indefinitely without trial.
How naive are you to think they haven't done this? Or that any major country hasn't done this?
for April fools someone should make them roam around screaming exterminate or spout some claptrap quotes
>what else would you used a hired cop for
>the reason you get a gaurd is so that they can kick someone's ass if they cause problems
security guard here:
you're a moron. only the insane-rich can afford home security like that. most guards stand post at businesses, and on the occasions that it's residential, its for shit like gated communities and ghettos, where the guard would be looking out for the grounds rather than a specific home.
these are hardly a replacement for anything. it can't apprehend anyone, as a malfunction = a sued owner rather than a sued and fired guard.
it can't employ force to protect people because again, malfunction = liability to the owner rather than to the guard.
it can't employ lethal force because it would be an electronic trigger device (classified as a machine gun) and the liability would be rediculous in the case of malfunction.
It can't administer first aid or CPR...because again, liability for malfunction would fall to the owner rather than onto an expendable employee.
face it: guardbot doesn't insulate the owner from the expenses related to being sued for malfunction quite like a human guard who, as a legal agent himself, can be sued independantly of the firm he is employed by.
Plus there's the fact that they can't even navigate a roadside curb without falling over.
Guardbot doesn't exist to replace you retard, it exists to reduce your numbers. In the presentation they said that a team of 10 security staff could be reduced to 3 humans babysitting 7 robots.
Implying that devices like these wont be employed in public spaces. What defines public and private space anyhow? Some dollar bills? You all don't understand what a commons is and how the commons has been snaked from under your feet. Literally. You guys are such tools it hurts. Thanks for the keks.
Aye, the same thing could have been said for airline travel 50 years ago. You don't seem to be comprehending what is going on in this country. There is extreme profit in mechanization of tasks which would normally be carried out by low paid humans. Fast food, security, service. Its all going to be replaced by automation and mechanization. The cost to develop these systems is high... but once the numbers have been crunched and the math done... well you dont ever need to put any more capital into it. This is unlike a human worker which regardless will need capital to maitain and replacement when they can no longer perform the task.
would they want to, really?
I mean, if I could have a choice between
>taking financial responsibility for myself
>pawning financial responsibility on some expendable sap
which would I choose and which would generate more revenue?
>What defines public and private space anyhow?
The documents saying that land is owned by the government or a private citizen do my friend.
I have a detailed map that lists exactly where the property I own goes to and where it stops.
Anywhere there is my privately owned property, anything outside that I treat as someone else's.
When you can base your business model on taking the fall or lawyering up a legal barricade you would. The company deving these things would most likely do one of these things.
At $3k a month per unit you'd be able to afford the occasional legal case.
They automatically detect people who move too fast, are too loud, are overly nervous or hide their face. This hints at a crime happening.
In such a case a human operator is notified, who can talk over a live feed and use the inbuilt taser or pepperspray.
Looking forward to when I can rent one for parties.
feels cyberpunk man
nothing more comfy than security drones