Should hunting be allowed with new AI sight?

[wombat13]

Take a look at this new AI sight that is currently only available to military (for now). It uses tech developed for intercepting missiles and only allows the shot to break when it calculates a hit. What do you think about it's eventual use for hunting?

The Israeli inventor who turns every soldier into a sharpshooter

The SMASH smart fire control system has successfully countered drones and terrorists in Gaza; Smart Shooter CEO Michal Mor shares her journey of creating a revolutionary combat system now embraced by elite units in militaries worldwide

www.ynetnews.com

 

[wombat13]

I voted "No". In my opinion, using this sight in combination with feeders changes hunting to farming. Feeders aside, what I like about hunting is that it combines so many skills to yield success, scouting, patience, endurance (potentially), marksmanship, etc. If this sight really reliably produces hits with little practice, then it eliminates a key skill and significantly degrades hunting.

 

[NIGHTLORD40K]

Meh, when culling destructive or herd-controlled critters- like feral hogs- I don't consider "fairness" a factor. The more quickly and efficiently such animals are removed, the better.

Also, I don't know that this scope will have any advantages when it comes to shot placement on the animals vitals.

Even with a device like this, you still need patience/planning and/or stalking, not to mention dressing and disposal of the animals.

I'm sure when optical scopes first became available to common folks there was some debate about whether they "should" be used, but little doubt about their effectiveness.

 

[jmorris]

There have been "tagging" scopes before.

'Intelligent' Rifle Lets You Pre-Tag Your Target, Then Fire When Ready

By "tagging" the ideal shot through the rifle scope before firing, shooters may never miss again.

www.popsci.com

I had just about finished my remote control rifle project when they outlawed remote control hunting. So I just built a remote control rap, so they stick around and I kill them with a regular .22lr...

The illegal way I would get one at a time, the legal way, I get the whole sounder, at my leasure.

Trap them before I go to bed.



And they are waiting on me in the morning, when I get there.

 

[jmr40]

You can always choose not to use it if you find it unsporting. I know several people who only hunt with traditional long bows even though modern rifles are an option.

I'm not a huge fan of crossbows, but they are legal here during archery season. IMO they should be legal if someone wants to hunt with one, but they should only be allowed during rifle season, not during archery season.

But they are allowed by law, and there is nothing that says I can't use traditional archery tackle.

 

[CraigC]

Absolutely not. When I mash the trigger, I don't want to wait for permission to launch a projectile. Hit or miss, I want it to be on me, not a friggin' computer. I like my time in the woods to be devoid of computers.

 

[DeepSouth]

While I wouldn’t use one, I absolutely think they should be legal.
But in full disclosure I pretty much (very few exceptions) oppose hunting laws other than bag limits. The means, caliber, time of day, attire of the hunter, food the animal is eating, etc, etc, is irrelevant to me.

 

[Hugger-4641]

I voted other. I think for deer and other game: No.
Ai is probably not gonna know how many hunters are on the other side of that rise when the shot is released and even the best military guidance systems still fail frequently.
For nuisance hogs and other invasive species:
Maybe, under strictly predefined areas and protocols ..
Otherwise we already have enough mindless folks behind triggers. Just my 2c.

 

[theotherwaldo]

I don't care for legal limitations on anything related to the Second Amendment.
Personally, I'm not a sport hunter.
I hunt to harvest or to dispose of vermin or hazardous animals.
To me, though, getting a sight like this makes no economic sense.
-And if you are a 'sportsman', hunting with something like that sounds like a good way to lose your manliness card... .

 

[Howland937]

I voted no. Most advancements in firearms technology (and hunting gear in general) were brought about by the needs of some military or another. Quite often it translates well to civilian use, but this one? Please no.
People often don't do enough critical thinking before pulling the trigger. Let's not make lack of thought even more prevalent.

Now, for those folks dealing with invasive/destructive species:
If military tech is available, napalm may be a better option.

 

[jdsingleshot]

I voted no, but I'm going to toot my own horn here just for fun. Back in the 1980s, I wrote an article that was published in Guns Magazine (They misspelled my last name as "David" instead of Davis.)

Scanners were just showing up in grocery stores and I talked to an industry research & development guy about applications for firearms and the possibility of creating a system that would only let the rifle fire when it was aligned to make a lethal shot on the quarry. Even then, while he said some more work would be needed, he believed it would be possible.

I envisioned this concept 35 years ago. ;-)

 

[wombat13]

I don't care for legal limitations on anything related to the Second Amendment.
Personally, I'm not a sport hunter.
I hunt to harvest or to dispose of vermin or hazardous animals.
To me, though, getting a sight like this makes no economic sense.
-And if you are a 'sportsman', hunting with something like that sounds like a good way to lose your manliness card... .

Fair enough, but hunting regulations are not a limitation on the 2nd.

 

[jmorris]

Fair enough, but hunting regulations are not a limitation on the 2nd.

Until they are. Talking with a friend this last week about when he was hunting overlapping seasons (dove and deer, as well as duck) and the game warden that was giving him flack about having ammunition that was not all steel shot on him.

"...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." Sure can be infringed upon... If I can't have a gun on me during non firearms seasons...or lead ammo I am not shooting at ducks with but have incase something else I am after comes along.

Regulations, by definition, are limitations and if they limit or eliminate a firearms usefulness...

 

[Hartkopf]

I like to think in logical conclusions. This AI sight is being refined and with other technology already available, would not even need a human. The government drone could just run free and kill all the hogs in an area. Just let it roam. Funding is no issue because printers. Everyone hates hogs so no reason not have the drones on your property just killing away. The government programmers will decide the shape and size of the hogs for the AI to read, to then kill. The programmers and the AI will never stray from that shape and size.

 

[jmorris]

The government programmers will decide the shape and size of the hogs for the AI to read, to then kill.

Yeah, the only way to perpetuate a problem is to get the .gov involved in solving it...

The little ones can walk out of most traps but sometimes, when they are not, you get lucky...thats when its nice to have a heavy drop gate.

 

[mcb]

I like to think in logical conclusions. This AI sight is being refined and with other technology already available, would not even need a human. The government drone could just run free and kill all the hogs in an area. Just let it roam. Funding is no issue because printers. Everyone hates hogs so no reason not have the drones on your property just killing away. The government programmers will decide the shape and size of the hogs for the AI to read, to then kill. The programmers and the AI will never stray from that shape and size.

More generally:
Is the sighting system in the OP article really artificial intelligence? The only mention of AI is in the image processing. That is far from a general AI entity. Nothing that sight does has not been done before using non-AI algorithms.

AI is some remarkable technology but is way over hyped lately and we are still a long ways from a true general AI. They are still just allot of fancy math that fools some into thinking there is a reasoning intelligence there, there is not. A great tool but one that is only as smart as the data it was trained on.

ETA sorry about the double posts, maybe a mod can delete the first one with only the image in the reply.

 

[red rick]

I wouldn’t have a problem with it . IMO the whole idea with hunting season is to manage the population of the animals . If it makes it easier for someone to kill an animal and not miss or wound it , I don’t see anything wrong with it . I would rather see someone kill the animal than wound it . Yeah I know that they could still wound it anyway , but maybe there is less of a chance . I might not want to use it , but I wouldn’t look down on someone who did , just like using a compound bow , or a crossbow over a long bow , or a scoped inline over a flintlock , or percussion muzzleloader .

 

[Atavar]

I don't care for legal limitations on anything related to the Second Amendment.
Personally, I'm not a sport hunter.
I hunt to harvest or to dispose of vermin or hazardous animals.
To me, though, getting a sight like this makes no economic sense.
-And if you are a 'sportsman', hunting with something like that sounds like a good way to lose your manliness card... .

What does 2A have to do with hunting?

 

[3Crows]

Not sure, would need to think on it. If the AI could reduce game animal wounding, maybe. If the AI could detect a human vs the legal in season game, maybe.

Actually, no, because I do not want any electronics or batteries or internet or WWW inside my rifles. This is a gateway to electronic weapons with finger print readers and electronic ignition and big brother riding on your shoulder second guessing us.

 

[CraigC]

IMHO, if it's smart enough to recognize the target for what it is, its positioning, the path of the bullet on impact, etc., and do all the processing of ballistic data and variables, it's smart enough to be used in better ways than that.

 

[mcb]

Not sure, would need to think on it. If the AI could reduce game animal wounding, maybe. If the AI could detect a human vs the legal in season game, maybe.

Actually, no, because I do not want any electronics or batteries or internet or WWW inside my rifles. This is a gateway to electronic weapons with finger print readers and electronic ignition and big brother riding on your shoulder second guessing us.

I would love to have ellectically primed cartridges for small arms (RIP Remington and Etronx). The design possibilities that can't be realized with percussion primes but could with eclectically primed cartridges are pretty remarkable and it would give the ATF a migraines and nightmares at the same time. Electronics in guns does not by default mean big brother has control, but it would require a customer base smart enough to know the difference and embrace the good uses and punish the bad uses of electronics. The smart device market has this base all bit it a small percentage relatively unknown, but very healthy, the current gun market does not unfortunately.

 

[3Crows]

Okay I have considered upon the question and my answer is a solid NO! No AI, no electronics, no batteries, no e-ignition, no electronic trigger, no finger print readers, no AI safety guardian angel, no GPS, no uploading a kill verification to the DNR. Just NO!

 

[Patocazador]

I hunt with a 1909 Mannlicher-Schoenauer in 6.5 M-S cal. Can't you guess how I would vote?
NO! NO! Absolutely, Positively NO!

Sport-hunting should encompass the components necessary for the "hunter" to actually hunt and be proficient in ballistics, deer/game anatomy and be able to deliver a lethal shot with either bow or gun.

Artificial intelligence will make us all into Kardashians! DUH.

 

[mcb]

This is sport hunting, what equipment should and should not be allowed is completely arbitrary. The only truly fair chase would be to show up naked and empty handed, but that is equally absurd.

 

[Hartkopf]

The natural progression of just about everything is to steepen the slippery slope. Slopes everywhere just keep getting steeper. ⛷