>>106176351 >Not for you if you have to ask here but i was told by the worms in my head that this board is the ultimate source of technological insight.
>>106176267 (OP) Theoretically yes but it would be extremely difficult with current technology. Just tracking humans would be a problem, let alone running, capturing without killing, and then giving clear instructions while somehow keeping humans from running away.
>>106176453 i ask cuz i recently saw that simulations can be to train robots using a vr headset that hand tracks you as guidance. you could just reenact capturing a human and then it runs like a thousand different simulations in parallel each with a thousand variations in parameters or some shit. then the end result is an optimized hunting bot. Can a consumer access such processing power?