Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 Technology. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 Dr Octopus LIVES! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 20, 2005 Author Share Posted June 20, 2005 Dr Octopus LIVES! 362243[/snapback] I was thinking along the lines of Starship Troopers or Warhammer 40K, but yeah, that works... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 20, 2005 Author Share Posted June 20, 2005 And in other Technology news: I like this one. Imagine us beign able to project power on our enemies 24/7/365 without human casaulties or fatigue. Just instantaneous, point and click death from above. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Benjamin Franklin Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 And in other Technology news: I like this one. Imagine us beign able to project power on our enemies 24/7/365 without human casaulties or fatigue. Just instantaneous, point and click death from above. 362251[/snapback] And imagine our enemies doing that to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 20, 2005 Author Share Posted June 20, 2005 And imagine our enemies doing that to us. 362253[/snapback] Fortunatley, there are no other nations capable of building these things, at least ones that aren't hostile to us. Key is, we build them first. That way we can keep them from building them. Nice quote, this: "But it may not be long before UCAVs overcome their limitations. In early February, the Boeing pair took off from Edwards, circled over the Mojave Desert, automatically attacked a simulated missile site, and returned to their orbits. Minutes later a second missile site, unknown to the UCAVs’ computers, advertised its presence by sending simulated radar signals, and the UCAVs attacked it, too. The ground-based operator’s only job was to OK the release of weapons." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark VI Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 And in other Technology news: I like this one. Imagine us beign able to project power on our enemies 24/7/365 without human casaulties or fatigue. Just instantaneous, point and click death from above. 362251[/snapback] Forget it. We'd outsource the operations to Pakistan to impress the shareholders, forgetting our actual mission. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 Forget it. We'd outsource the operations to Pakistan to impress the shareholders, forgetting our actual mission. 362257[/snapback] While I find the statement pretty funny, sadly it would be true as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 Technology. 362233[/snapback] Is this going to be protested by the far, far right for being against God's will, or by the far, far left for...well, for reasons known only to them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 Is this going to be protested by the far, far right for being against God's will, or by the far, far left for...well, for reasons known only to them? 362282[/snapback] Well, we could start a poll to have people come up with "reasons" of the far far left. You know we need another poll since TD is the Son of Satan is gone... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 20, 2005 Author Share Posted June 20, 2005 Is this going to be protested by the far, far right for being against God's will, or by the far, far left for...well, for reasons known only to them? 362282[/snapback] I don't think there's a religious argument to be made against THIS technology. Well, except for the fact that the military could somehow co-opt it and use it as an instrument of death. But that's a whole other can of worms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 I don't think there's a religious argument to be made against THIS technology. Well, except for the fact that the military could somehow co-opt it and use it as an instrument of death. But that's a whole other can of worms. 362288[/snapback] There's ALWAYS a religious argument to be made for and against something. One could argue that powered exoskeletons are against God's will since he obviously WANTS the crippled to be immobile. Not that I'm saying that myself...but given that there's people who shoot OBGYN's in the name of "thou shalt not kill", somewhere out there some narrow-minded zealot will believe power-assisted mobility is unholy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 20, 2005 Author Share Posted June 20, 2005 There's ALWAYS a religious argument to be made for and against something. One could argue that powered exoskeletons are against God's will since he obviously WANTS the crippled to be immobile. Not that I'm saying that myself...but given that there's people who shoot OBGYN's in the name of "thou shalt not kill", somewhere out there some narrow-minded zealot will believe power-assisted mobility is unholy... 362420[/snapback] I think you'll get more arguments from eco-types when it comes to non-biological technology. Youd you imagine something akin to a deep sea suit, armored with composite materials and air-conditioned with a powered exoskeleton inside? You'd have a bulletproof, chem-weapons-proof and superhuman-strength killing machine on two legs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 I think you'll get more arguments from eco-types when it comes to non-biological technology. 362428[/snapback] No doubt. I just have an easier time imagining the far-far-right's looney reaction ("God doesn't like it!") than the far-far-left's...simply because their looney reaction could be for any one of a number of BS reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 I think you'll get more arguments from eco-types when it comes to non-biological technology. Youd you imagine something akin to a deep sea suit, armored with composite materials and air-conditioned with a powered exoskeleton inside? You'd have a bulletproof, chem-weapons-proof and superhuman-strength killing machine on two legs. 362428[/snapback] That doesn't sound like anything any Christian person would welcome. I'd think a Christian person would want to find ways to prevent killing, not hone it to a precision science. And I'm not a right winger in case you had missed that somewhere. On the other hand, as long as there are men there are unfortunately going to be idiots starting wars. So these things should be developed and handed out to all women and children, our beloved "collateral damage", to use as protection and defense. Now THAT I could support. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tux of Borg Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 And in other Technology news: I like this one. Imagine us beign able to project power on our enemies 24/7/365 without human casaulties or fatigue. Just instantaneous, point and click death from above. 362251[/snapback] I wonder how our friends over in China would defend against something like this. Assuming this thing runs on radio signals, couldn't China just jam the signal? Something they have a lot of experience at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted June 20, 2005 Share Posted June 20, 2005 They'd better be careful. Before long, those robotic planes will develop a mind of their own and start attacking everything human. At least, that's what I'm told at the movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted June 21, 2005 Share Posted June 21, 2005 I wonder how our friends over in China would defend against something like this. Assuming this thing runs on radio signals, couldn't China just jam the signal? Something they have a lot of experience at. 362699[/snapback] Probably not. I know how I'd design the thing to make it unjammable as a practical matter (satellite LOS burst transmissions, semi-autonomous flight modes), and I have got to believe that Boeing can do a better job than I can... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 21, 2005 Author Share Posted June 21, 2005 On the other hand, as long as there are men there are unfortunately going to be idiots starting wars. So these things should be developed and handed out to all women and children, our beloved "collateral damage", to use as protection and defense. Now THAT I could support. 362677[/snapback] Sexist bigot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 21, 2005 Share Posted June 21, 2005 On the other hand, as long as there are men there are unfortunately going to be idiots starting wars. So these things should be developed and handed out to all women and children, our beloved "collateral damage", to use as protection and defense. Now THAT I could support. 362677[/snapback] ... and Maggie took a cruiser, with all hands. Apparently, to make 'em give it back. -------------------------- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted June 21, 2005 Share Posted June 21, 2005 We've been doing something like this with small drones in Afghanistan. A drone with one or two missles was controlled from Tampa, Fl. It flew around a building in Afghanistan where Taliban/ Al Quidea members were meeting, watching them enter. When they had all the members there, they shot the missle and blew up the building. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tux of Borg Posted June 21, 2005 Share Posted June 21, 2005 Probably not. I know how I'd design the thing to make it unjammable as a practical matter (satellite LOS burst transmissions, semi-autonomous flight modes), and I have got to believe that Boeing can do a better job than I can... 362852[/snapback] Off topic... I met a guy who maintained a satellite operating system for a living. He shared some interesting stories with me. Sometimes the satellite will get all foobar and just float in space. They would have to call him in to reboot the OS. He said every time he rebooted the OS it lost all its patches. So he would have to upload them from scratch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted June 21, 2005 Share Posted June 21, 2005 We've been doing something like this with small drones in Afghanistan. A drone with one or two missles was controlled from Tampa, Fl. It flew around a building in Afghanistan where Taliban/ Al Quidea members were meeting, watching them enter. When they had all the members there, they shot the missle and blew up the building. 362923[/snapback] Different drones...what you're talking about was a glorified recon drone; the strike capability is secondary. The UCAVs are purpose-built remotely piloted combat vehicles. The recon drone (the Predator) was also controlled in-theater; the imagery was beamed back to Tampa, and the order to strike was given from there, but the actual operator was in Pakistan, I believe. That's turning out to be one of the bigger issues with the current technology, actually...the real-time imagery being beamed back to HQ is giving high-ranking officers the ability to very easily interfere in the field, which, as Johnson and McNamara proved in Vietnam, is a generally bad idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted June 21, 2005 Share Posted June 21, 2005 Off topic... I met a guy who maintained a satellite operating system for a living. He shared some interesting stories with me. Sometimes the satellite will get all foobar and just float in space. They would have to call him in to reboot the OS. He said every time he rebooted the OS it lost all its patches. So he would have to upload them from scratch. 362932[/snapback] That's what they get for using Windows! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted June 21, 2005 Share Posted June 21, 2005 Is "HAL" really a wisely chosen name for this project? The computer that sabotages the mission? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 21, 2005 Share Posted June 21, 2005 MechaStreisand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EC-Bills Posted June 21, 2005 Share Posted June 21, 2005 MechaStreisand 363202[/snapback] Somone please tell me Robert Smith of the Cure is still alive, he's the only one who can defeat MechaStreisand! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 21, 2005 Author Share Posted June 21, 2005 Somone please tell me Robert Smith of the Cure is still alive, he's the only one who can defeat MechaStreisand! 363275[/snapback] Well, him or James T. Kirk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted June 21, 2005 Share Posted June 21, 2005 Well, him or James T. Kirk. 363277[/snapback] dude, if Leornard Malten couldn't handle MechaStreisand, do you really think Kirk could? She'd end up spanking his bum with his own toupee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted June 21, 2005 Share Posted June 21, 2005 That's what they get for using Windows! 363143[/snapback] About six years ago, the USS Yorktown had a major power plant failure and had to be towed back into Norfolk for two days of repairs. The reason? As part of their manpower reduction initiatives, the Navy had "wisely" decided to automate their engineering plants with Windows NT 4.0 workstations...and one of the workstations experienced a divide-by-0 "blue screen of death" crash, taking down the engines and bringing the billion-dollar guided missile cruiser to a screeching halt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Typical TBD Guy Posted June 22, 2005 Share Posted June 22, 2005 On the other hand, as long as there are men there are unfortunately going to be idiots starting wars. So these things should be developed and handed out to all women and children, our beloved "collateral damage", to use as protection and defense. 362677[/snapback] Are you overweight? You sound overweight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts