-1
$\begingroup$

Let's imagine I have necessities to expand warfare into one of these two possible fields out of lack for different/previous options.

Build big war machines which are completely robotic, or breed kaiju-like big beasts using CRISPR (genetic editing) and then implement them through technology, turning them into cyborgs (even just to make them substain their own weight). An important note, such cyborgs would not be able to self reproduce (so they lack the fire&forget philosophy about bombing a planet with a couple of Xenomorphs Queen and let them overrun all other life forms).

They would be living beings with implemented muscles, skeletons, and weapons. On the other hand there are robots, fully machine. Same weapons, but no internal organs, biologic muscles nor veins.

I would like to know which would be the better option.

At first I supposed it would be the cyborgs because they can self-feed through preys (enemies) but I quickly realize that robots could be structured so to ingest&melt fallen enemies in order to harvest calories and minerals/metals.

So I switched to robots. Subsequently, I realized that robots can be hacked and you do not want for your billions-costed walking nuke to fall in the hands of the enemies. Plus I suppose robots would anyway need more energy than cyborgs in order to work.

So my curiosity switched back to cyborgs. I also realized that only an extremely advanced AI can work as efficiently as the instinct from a predator DNA would.

And yet I reflected about the fact that cyborgs are easier to hurt I suppose (but a good armour would maybe do the work) and being living creature they would feel fear (pain can be shut down through meds).

I would really love to hear from you, ranging from short&clever reflections to long mathematical computations about energy spent for the robots and/or economical costs (in this case feel free to include detailed maths about them for I have a bit of a background in those subjects).

An additional question is about how much of a cyborg would it be fitting to be cybernetic (weapons excluded). Bones must surely be implemented with metallic nanoparticles and an external armour is mandatory, but would it be better when it comes to cost/expense ratio of both economical resources and energy, to replace all organs with machines, or even create a robot and then just put a living brain in it so to avoid hacking? Or on the contrary, a fully living being with just a metallic skeleton/skin/fangs/teeth (and missile-launchers on its back but here we are speaking of a different matter)?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ Both are better. Not because one is equal to the other in term of viability, but because you don't give any constraints, so you can give them as many "winning" traits as you want. Also because a weapon is made for a specific target in specific conditions, not as an overall, all-year-round winner :). So in order to answer you need to describe what both options are exactly (rather than what they could be by comparing one to the other), tell where they fight (forest, mountain, city...), and against what they fight exactly. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 7, 2022 at 17:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Not all robots can be hacked. A computer can be built that has no wireless tech and has only a single physical interface, and that interface could even be physically removed after the firmware and software are loaded and before inserting the computer parts into the weapons platform. Only in Hollywood can all robots be hacked, and that's because writers often want there to be a way for the good guys to turn total defeat into total victory at the very last minute. The videogame Horizon Zero Dawn has believable robots that are halfway between hackable and unhackable. $\endgroup$
    – Tom
    Commented Jul 7, 2022 at 18:07
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ This isn't a discussion site. We're here to provide quality answers to specific questions, one at a time. Unless you edit your post to ask a single, focused, non-opinion-based question, this post is likely to be closed. $\endgroup$
    – sphennings
    Commented Jul 7, 2022 at 18:13
  • $\begingroup$ @FringesExplorer your question is closed, but only up until you edit your question! To get it to re-open you should edit your question to include some background on the war you are fighting and general differences between cyborgs vs robots (you have done it a bit but a clearer picture would be nice). Then a focused question based on that, with criteria that allow you to pick a best answer. This cannot be subjective like "which one is best", we need to know what YOU think is best. $\endgroup$
    – Demigan
    Commented Jul 7, 2022 at 20:45

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

Logically you would use them for their strengths.

A complete robot would require lots of high-end materials to function. Looking at the requirements for modern computing in for example air superiority fighters means that the amount of rare resources and construction time are high. In the meantime a cyborg using biological brains to take over much of the computing would already save a lot of resources, coding and construction time.

A biological being like that would function more like a giant pile of bio-nanobots. Creating chemicals, materials and self-repairing parts of the overall cyborg. This also has a drawback: although its easier to get the resources for the cyborgs they also require far more (bio) resources in their upkeep. Dont get me wrong, the maintenance, lubricants, coolants, replacement parts etc of the robots will be substantial, but biological matter dies when its not sustained while a robot can (more) easily run dry, be recovered and repaired compared to a cyborg that didnt get to feed.

So what you WANT is an army of robots. But that isnt always optimal so you build cyborgs on the side to complement them.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

So what you have described is a classic game of "rock paper scissors". Lacking any constraints on your world. It is after all your world your rules. Do you have to pick one? Why not all of the above? Use the one best suited for the task at hand. No answer can be universally correct. Deploying your monsters in space? use a robot! no need to breath. Into the ocean? send a Kiju! they don't rust. Desert? Cyborg ...IDK why not you have them!

$\endgroup$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .