Slashdot Mirror

Paladin is an old program, started in 1963 I believe. The cancelled artillery program you are referring to is probably Crusader.

The Army needs helicopters to move soldiers around the battlefield, but with so many other ways of directing fire (much more accurate indirect fire through Paladin systems, for example), and better coordination with the fast-movers (the Air Force and Army have a ways to go in this regard, but they're getting better), the days of the wannabe Hind are over.

Say what you will about Rumsfeld, but he has at least made the top brass look long and hard at all the systems in the pipeline to be sure they match future needs.

Read this - a press release from the US army STRICOM dated Nov. 19th. 2003 - there was probably some other US coverage at that time. The article's a bit more informative than the beeb one actually, as it shows the size of the There contract ($3.5m - which I guess puts it as something between 6mo. and a year, depending on the team size - its interesting that There haven't even put a press release about it), and that the Army are funding this speculatively - there is no group that actually wants this for training yet.

The beeb is reporting it because they read the article on Homelan Fed last week. There's more coverage here

For those interested in what is going on in government behind the scenes, don't always think people who post the kinds of things I post are all conspiratorial stories aimed at bringing down government through chaos. Hell look at sites like FAS, Cryptome, Arms Control, and the multitude of others. Many people point things out but too many are concerned with menial things such as Janet's boobs, Sex and the Shitty, etc., to notice the rug being pulled from under them. Hell most Americans think CNN and Fox are the holy grail of news. Get out there and read, know what's happening in your country. Check out BBC, Observer, Greg Palast, AntiWar, Chomsky. These people aren't being controlled via advertisers, not political pressure. I write sometimes too kooky assed documents, that some might say aren't worth a pot to piss in. Maybe so, but there is a reason for me rambling on like a madman sometimes. I care about my privacy and liberty. I don't want my friends or family growing up in something out of "Escape from Alcatraz"

I agree, and I believe the US armed forces are doing far more training about dealing with civilians and peacekeeping roles than ever before. Recently I was watching a show on the Op(osing) Force simulations the US Army runs at Fort Bragg, California, they went so far as to hire civilain role players that would react to how the military was interacting with them with either help or terrorist attacks.

Training can only help so much though, and even trained police have problems dealing with suicide attacks on checkpoints.

But all of this is somewhat beside the topic. DARPA is an Advanced Research Projects Agency. Their job and charter is not the social interactions of our military but rather making sure that the US retains their technological edge by funding research in to technology that has the potential to revolutionize war. It is an exciting and scarey at the same time field. But it is not an either or proposition with reguards to training soldiers to be better peacekeepers. Even if the US military never uses performance enhancing drugs they would still want to know about them in order to deal with oppponents who would use them.

" Teach them how to maintain peace, not war." and you have no need to maintain peace because you just *lost* the war. Instead:

Teach them to win a war, and maintain the peace thereafter.

Port Knocks.

..is when the mindless masses try to express the problem they are having with their machine:

"My computer is broken."
"My shit is fucked up."
"HELP!"

Yes, these are typical tech support emails I get (in their entirety). Could these people possibly be more specific? Let us not forget that it is almost invariably some small, pathetic problem. For example, I had a user who claimed he was not receiving any email, so I went to check out his computer. Lo and behold, the little plus mark for his email account was not expanded and he could not find his inbox, so therefore he concluded that he was not receiving email.

These things drive me nuts. They keep me from doing such things as redesigning our hideous webpage which has not seen a makeover in at least four years. Please, something useful for once.

Oh no, the phone is ringing again.. Someone's email is "down", someone's computer will not "turn on", someone cannot find solitare. Help them? HELP ME.

[/rant]
Sorry. =)

Infant mortality skyrocketed in the rest of Iraq during the sanctions years. Lack of access to medicines, clean water, basic nutrition.

TheGuardian says that your claim of 500,000 children being killed is false.

Of course, it is a shame that Saddam spent the money for their food and medicine on building large lavish palaces, buying weapons, building illegal missiles, and stashing billions abroad. Don't you agree?

While I personally agree that it's just ionizing the air, two experiments with conflicting results isn't exactly scientific proof. I seem to recall a third experiment besides the NASA one but don't remember off the top of my head who performed it...

Unfortunately there hasn't been just a whole lot of real research into the effect, possibly due to the "UFO anti-gravity sekr3tz" air surrounding it.

Ah, I remember now. The third one was done by the Army Research Labs. The abstract for the paper is here. Unfortunately, the PDF itself seems to have been deleted from the official site (break out your tinfoil hats, heh), but there is a mirror.
Looks like they didn't try the vacuum experiment, but theorized (and did some math based on) that the effect was the sum of two different forces: A smaller one (ionic wind) that would persist in a vacuum, and a larger one (charge drift) that required a fluid dielectric such as the air.

Here is a nice page from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers on Ice Ages, that briefly touches upon the cyclicity of Ice Ages. I think they are a little like the business cycles, just a little bit longer.

From the website:

In 1867, James Croll, a self-taught astronomer, compiled information from a variety of sources -- including Isaac Newton's Theory of Radiant Energy. His work led to the development of a sound astronomical theory supporting the idea of cyclic ice ages. Croll's goal was to geologically predict when ice ages would occur and to explain the mechanism that caused them.

If the artists and designers want a heads-up, in case we do end up back in an ice age rather abruptly , here (ice age art) is a good site to brush up on.

Good to see they've got their priorities right. Their search tool only brought up one other reference to Iraq, concerning assessment of bomb damage last May.

Army policy on alternative fuel R&D is that any fuel considered must be less flammable than JP-8.

"Of particular concern has been the conflation of al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's Iraw as a single, undifferentiated terrorist threat. This was a strategi error of the first order because it ignored critical differences between the two in character, threat level and susceptibility to US deterrence and military action. The result has been an unnecessary preventative war of choice against a deterred Iraw that has created a new front in the Middle East for Islamic terrorism and diverted attention and resources away from securing the American homeland against further assault by an undeterrable al-Qaeda. The war against Iraq was not integral to the GWOT, but rather a detour from it." (Any typos are mine.)

I'd love to see a democratic Iraq, which is why I initially had some faith in the Bush administration and supported the war. But let's face facts--we took a big gamble by invading Iraq, and it's not likely to work out in our favor.

The military is one of the few institutions to tackle fundemental research, and almost hopeless challenges on a large scale. Why, their need is great, their reasources are large, and so are the rewards.

It is arguable that computers would not exist at all without the military. Let alone global computer networks. Add to that communications satillites, and anything in space. For both the US and USSR the space race was about puting nukes on people. But that also gave us aluminum cans. And a lot of ceramic technologies. Need I point out RADAR, and the multitude of uses we put it to today? Or the lives it saves with weather forecasting? Or nuclear power. Did I mention jet engines? Or turbine technology in all it's incarnations? Let alone consumer products like Jeeps and Humvees. Or trauma medicine. The stirup? Can't leave out frequency hopping.

All this, monsterously large segments of the civilian economy, exists because of a military need at one time. General solutions to nearly forgotten problems. Take the military our of research institutions and you put a lot of researchers out of work.

So nothing new, another SNAFU, and your argument is FUBAR, another goof ball with a hemp cap and not enough common sense to fill it. Have a little appretiation for the freedom you enjoy, the freedom to bitch, and not know any better. More admirable people than yourself die to stamp your hand at the door of the little freedom party, and many of them never killed anyone. So your task, should you find you have any personal honor and decide to accept it, is to learn about the US Army Core of Engineers.

There's also the interesting fact that Japan is the only country in the world to have a foreign military base in its capital

Your military tourism handbook is defective.

For starters, there's Yongsan Army Garrison in Seoul.

How about Navy? There's NAVEUR headquarters in London, with several more scattered around, some suburban.

Kuwait and Riyadh also come to mind, although that second is declining...

I'm bored with chasing down links, so I'll just add that there are plenty of foreign military bases in Baghdad.

All the Army Watercraft are not navy!
The Army Transportation Corps (wo)man the tugboats. They handle the ship to shore transport of equipment and supplies.

Not sure of the numbers now, but back in the 80s, the US Army has more watercraft than the Navy, more aircraft than the Airforce, and more grunts than the Marines.

Check FAS.org for more info on the "Army's navy"
Another good place for information on the Transportation corps is Ft Eustis

They have.

What if there is no Iraq, and it's all a put-up job? Come on, two incredibly lopsided victories, minimal US casualties... what if there is no Iraq, and those troops are just being sent to Fort Irwin or something... "World Class Training for the World's Best Army" indeed! What about those millions of dollars that are going to Haliburton to "rebuild Iraq"? Right into Cheney's pockets! I mean, have you ever been to Iraq? Neither have I. All I have to go on is CNN, a thirty year old copy of the World Book Encyclopedias, and the internet... now, that "Dear Raed" guy might lie to me, but Ted Turner? Never!

I think that Iraq - the whole country - is a fake: just "like the 1960s moon mission"!

(Come on, the guy's got a Howard Dean sig, he'll believe anything!)


George Bush in 2004!

The Defense Language Institute is not a Berlitz course.

Intel's initial preference to supersede 200mm was 400mm, Applied Materials wanted 350mm. The industry settled on 300mm in the end, but there's currently a Japanese consortium working on 400mm wafers.

http://www.intel.com/technology/itj/q41998/article s/art_4.htm

http://www.arofe.army.mil/Reports/webelec/ssdm98z. htm

> Unless we take the time to understand and remove preconceived
> moral notions

Would be nice, but it won't happen.

Thinking about suicide bombers as crazy fucks is just -WAY- too intellectually comfortable. "They're not like us, son, they're /crazy/, etc". I've even seen the word 'brainwashed', in its hollywoodian acception, used to refer to them. What a cosy little way to think about it.

The truth, which I long suspected and which your link confirms (many thanks for posting it!!) is that they're just poor fucks who are made to feel a strong, emotional sense of kindred with an underlying group/cause, and made to hold that cause above themselves and everything else (with the tacit assumption that the 'cause' makes them better than the rest of the world, you'll note). People -are- willing to believe very strongly in anything, you know, provided that it makes themselves feel that they are 'better'. "-We- will go to Heaven," "-We- are the freest country in the world", etc, etc.

Now I see those of you who think fast begin to twitch. Yep, the above definition applies exactly (and I do mean 'exactly', not 'almost' or 'fairly well') to would-be patriots. They just die and kill a little less (or a little more, I'm not entirely sure), although for the same reasons.

People are born with little gears in their head, you see, that work the same in Miami and in Tehran. You can make this little experiment for yourself: pick someone at random, determine which group they belong to (religious, nation, etc...), and then tell them something like, "I think that <group>'s quality of life is not as good..." or anything like that, as long as it's 1) a personal opinion that 2) goes against the aforementionned sense that their group is 'better'. There are three major ways people can react:
- The wise way is not to give a damn what you think, frankly, since it's just your idea and you thinking so doesn't make it true.
- The intelligent way is to express curiosity about what you're basing your statement on, in case there might be some truth to it.
- The emotional way is to immediately try to disprove your statement without considering it.

Try it out for yourself, and see which way most people react.

Strong, emotional sense of kindred with a group/cause, etc. It works frighteningly well.

No, really, anyone with a bit of wisdom will go back to thinking that suicide bombers are crazy, brainwashed, whatever, but just inherently different from you and I. The other option is just too uncomfortable.

• Intratech KG9 Full Auto Machine Gun $2669
  "You've seen the "TEC's" in the movies and on TV, now here's a chance to own one at an affordable price. This KG9 is a registered receiver conversion. It comes with the front K grip for added controlability. Its (sic) definately (sic) a handful of fun!"
• Groundbreaking for new machine gun plant in Georgia. " Columbus businesswoman Terry Hadden tries out the MP5SD, a sound suppressed submachine gun". Click here to buy.
• For those times when you need more firepower, try the Starstreak Hypervelocity Missile.
• Your posse can't get its act together? Here's how the Marines do it. The "Warfighting" series is a good read.
• Unsure what to do with all this firepower? Read Parameters, the journal of the Army War College, where generals talk shop.

The Army has an extensive selection process for new weapons, and they have stayed with the M16 series for 35 years now-- had something that better fits the needs of the troops and logistical requirements come along in the interim, you can bet that DoD would be using it. Developments in the 1980s with lasers and caseless ammunition (e.g. the HK G11 rifle) failed to improve on the performance of the M16 series, and DoD has continued to procure the M16 and more recently the M4 Carbine (a popular shortened version of the M16 issued to officers, tank crews, and troops other than front line riflemen). The current manufacturer of the M16 is FN Herstal in Belgium, and Colt is the manufacturer of the M4 Carbine. Both pieces are high-quality compared to a lot of junk in the private market. There are any number of manufacturers of M16/AR-15-type rifles, but Colt consistently brings the highest prices in private sales-- "if it's not a Colt, it's just a copy," as they say. While it is certainly possible to buy a better-quality AR-15 from a custom manufacturer, the Colt/FN combination offers DoD the best balance of cost, quality, and production capacity. There are developments under way now that may limit the useful life of currently issued weapons, but every rifle the DoD issues is designed to serve for many years in many sets of hands, with parts being replaced as needed. Check out your local Army surplus store and you'll see all manner of accessories, uniforms, and equipment that the DoD issues to its troops-- most of the *officially issued* stuff is high quality, while the aftermarket knockoffs are junk. You might be surprised at what gets issued...the Soldier Systems Center recently added the Vietnam-style Tomahawk to the Army infantryman's basic load.

The Army has an extensive selection process for new weapons, and they have stayed with the M16 series for 35 years now-- had something that better fits the needs of the troops and logistical requirements come along in the interim, you can bet that DoD would be using it. Developments in the 1980s with lasers and caseless ammunition (e.g. the HK G11 rifle) failed to improve on the performance of the M16 series, and DoD has continued to procure the M16 and more recently the M4 Carbine (a popular shortened version of the M16 issued to officers, tank crews, and troops other than front line riflemen). The current manufacturer of the M16 is FN Herstal in Belgium, and Colt is the manufacturer of the M4 Carbine. Both pieces are high-quality compared to a lot of junk in the private market. There are any number of manufacturers of M16/AR-15-type rifles, but Colt consistently brings the highest prices in private sales-- "if it's not a Colt, it's just a copy," as they say. While it is certainly possible to buy a better-quality AR-15 from a custom manufacturer, the Colt/FN combination offers DoD the best balance of cost, quality, and production capacity. There are developments under way now that may limit the useful life of currently issued weapons, but every rifle the DoD issues is designed to serve for many years in many sets of hands, with parts being replaced as needed. Check out your local Army surplus store and you'll see all manner of accessories, uniforms, and equipment that the DoD issues to its troops-- most of the *officially issued* stuff is high quality, while the aftermarket knockoffs are junk. You might be surprised at what gets issued...the Soldier Systems Center recently added the Vietnam-style Tomahawk to the Army infantryman's basic load.

More info about the new and controversial infantry vehicle Stryker is available here and here. Here are two nice videos of the Stryker in action.

More info about the new and controversial infantry vehicle Stryker is available here and here. Here are two nice videos of the Stryker in action.

Thanks for the thought, though!

I got out in 2000, but I was still in the USMC (0311, grunt, qty. 1) when we switched from the old LPC (Leather Personnel Carrier) to the new boot. I didn't get to try the desert boot, but I really liked the ICB, the first version was a bit hot/heavy, but I have heard from buddies that it is better now.

hmmmmm

Actually, disparaging the President is an offense under the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice), or at least it was in the 1980s.

Any commissioned officer who uses contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Transportation, or the Governor or legislature of any State, Territory, Commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

So the microwave won't work. (I tried and the couch just won't fit).

My new (patent pending) solution is the drive through RFID wash. Take your ordinary car wash, remove the hoses brush and crap. Install lead shielding and an EMP generator. Put your tires, sofa and clothing on the cart and when it emerges from the other end no more peskey RFIDs.

I can see a market for a Home EMP Kit as well. (The warning label reads, "Do not use near TVs, Computers, Pets, or Reproductive Organs".

SD

Yeah, it's a big secret.

Yeah, it's a big secret.

The Marines released a modified .wad file for Doom II. See this for more details.

The training come is Computer Based Training style and it's completely done on your own time.

You can find training on anything from how to use a computer to how to build your very own router/firewall/printserving coffeepot.

I had the opportunity to do some and it's pretty good haveing some knowledge in the subjects I chose to get "official" training. It is however bandwidth intensive and I had a hard time finding someplace that I could be for a while without losing my connection to the brass or whoever.

The company they use is, I guess, used by some other large organizations. You can find it at here although I think that the Website has been pretty b0rked lately with all the securtiy stuff.

Anyway I figured i could maybe shed some light. Even if I am a bit late.

Also, you might want to google for "Army Smartforce" for the latest information on computer based training for all soldiers, not just those in IT related jobs.

I mean: people seem blind to the fact that by moving jobs overseas, yes, they're lowering their bottom line, but they're ALSO PUTTING PEOPLE OUT OF WORK.

i.e. One job lost, one job gained. Yes, the person getting the job is making less money, but the stuff they get to buy is less overpriced. So people are still getting paid, products are still getting bought.

The problem (in your eyes) is that people here are losing jobs because someone else can offer the same service cheaper. Uhhh...free market, hello? NAFTA? World trade? Those weren't India's ideas.

This is when it's your job to INNOVATE. Free Software means you can start up your new company with very little capital, in your basement. Use all those free software tools to design a nifty little gadget, patent it, go nuts. Shoot a movie like The Blair Witch, write an album like The Strokes. Be an American. Shape up. Do something they haven't. It's unamerican to whine about other's good fortune, but you wouldn't guess it now (did everyone else miss the irony that you shat on the country that gave you the damn Statue of Liberty for exercising their free (as in libre) choice to not fight in a war they didn't believe in?).

But greed is the key, right?
YOUR greed to hang onto your cushy job when someone else can do it cheaper, apparently. You made your free market, now lie in it.

I'll continue to live in my Socialist Paradise where the Government employs people to write Free Software while your military foots the bill it. I love it.

This opens up some scary possibilities. Like flame wars between soldiers that like different Linux distros. Conducted with real flamethrowers!

I'm afraid our front line troops mostly do run Windows. This is one of the few military applications where Microsoft wouldn't have an almost automatic lock: almost nobody uses NT as a high-performance computing platform.

A several billion dollars fine would be perceived as a fine on the US economy from a EU who doesn't want to play the game of free market.

Therefore, no big fine will be paid (if ever asked).

Besides, Microsoft Army is stronger than the EU ones, so there is no point is discussing any form of sentence regarding a US company.

All the military simulation articles I have seen talk about the soldier game-type simulations. This is not the only simulations the military uses though. For instance here is a list of military tools used for planning and modeling. This goes form supply-chains to medical planning. I understand it's not as fun to think about groups of people filling in supply and demand info for ammo compared with troops walking through a mission on their computers; however, I'd think the first would be in the grand scheme of things more important.

For anyone that wants to compare the the insignia you can read about the Army's MI Branch insignia or shop for the same insignias at battlestargalactica.org

Why join them, when you CAN beat them!
http://www.army.mil/fact_files_site/hemtt/index.ht ml

Of course, fuel-economy really sucks - but then that's not really the point of an SUV, is it?!

More importantly, go to Silicon Valley and check out Halted Specialties (surplus electronics), Weird Stuff Warehouse, Fry's, the old HQ of Atari, Rooster T. Feathers on El Camino (today a comedy club, but formerly the site of Andy Capp's tavern, where the first PONG machine was rolled out), etc.

See Bay Model Visitor Center

When visiting Redstone Arsenal, be sure to check out NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center and the Redstone Scientific Information Center - if possible.

When visiting Redstone Arsenal, be sure to check out NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center and the Redstone Scientific Information Center - if possible.

Two definitely geeky things to check out in New Mexico.

The Very Large Array - Gigantic Radio Astronomy installation

The Trinity Test Site. Only open a few times a year, your chance to see where the first atomic bomb was tested.

If you really value job stability there's a few groups out there that will take you.

You mentioned this happened in a "goverment institution". If this was the military (especially Army), then your boss (as a civilian worker) is required to have annual EO/EEO training, including prevention of sexual harassment.

A short FAQ is online to spell out how to follow through on sexual harassment situation. In the Military, if your boss is the one who is sexually harassing you, then you can/must go to her boss, who is required to look into the matter, or else be subject to the same penalties has if s/he was also harassing you. Also, once an investigation is under way, the boss is prohibited from retaliating.

Now, with all that, does this apply to contractors? In the Military, the answer is yes.

Did your goverment institution also have EO/EEO procedures, and if so, do they exempt contractors from protection? You should be, and your institution should have an EO/EEO representative to contact.

And yes, you are being sexually harassed, according to the site:

What is Sexual Harassment?
Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination which is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC's guidelines define two types of sexual harassment: "quid pro quo" and "hostile environment."

hat is "quid pro quo" sexual harassment?
Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute "quid pro quo" sexual harassment when (1) submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment, or (2) submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual.

What is "hostile environment" sexual harassment?
Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute "hostile environment" sexual harassment when such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.

What factors determine whether an environment is "hostile?"
The central inquiry is whether the conduct "unreasonably interfered with an individual's work performance" or created "an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment." The EEOC will look at the following factors to determine whether an environment is hostile: (1) whether the conduct was verbal or physical or both; (2) how frequently it was repeated; (3) whether the conduct was hostile or patently offensive; (4) whether the alleged harasser was a co-worker or supervisor; (5) whether others joined in perpetrating the harassment; and (6) whether the harassment was directed at more than one individual. No one factor controls. An assessment is made based upon the totality of the circumstances.

What is unwelcome sexual conduct?
Sexual conduct becomes unlawful only when it is unwelcome. The challenged conduct must be unwelcome in the sense that the employee did not solicit or incite it, and in the sense that the employee regarded the conduct as undesirable or offensive.

How will the EEOC determine whether conduct is unwelcome?
When confronted with conflicting evidence as to whether conduct was welcome, the EEOC will look at the record as a whole and at the totality of the circumstances, evaluating each situation on a case by case basis. The investigation should determine whether the victim's conduct was consistent, or inconsistent, with his/her assertion that the sexual conduct was unwelcome.

Who can be a victim of sexual harassment?
The victim may be a woman or a man. The victim does not have to be of the opposite sex. The victim does not have to be the person harassed but could be anyone affected by the offensive conduct.

You mentioned this happened in a "goverment institution". If this was the military (especially Army), then your boss (as a civilian worker) is required to have annual EO/EEO training, including prevention of sexual harassment.

A short FAQ is online to spell out how to follow through on sexual harassment situation. In the Military, if your boss is the one who is sexually harassing you, then you can/must go to her boss, who is required to look into the matter, or else be subject to the same penalties has if s/he was also harassing you. Also, once an investigation is under way, the boss is prohibited from retaliating.

Now, with all that, does this apply to contractors? In the Military, the answer is yes.

Did your goverment institution also have EO/EEO procedures, and if so, do they exempt contractors from protection? You should be, and your institution should have an EO/EEO representative to contact.

And yes, you are being sexually harassed, according to the site:

What is Sexual Harassment?
Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination which is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The EEOC's guidelines define two types of sexual harassment: "quid pro quo" and "hostile environment."

hat is "quid pro quo" sexual harassment?
Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute "quid pro quo" sexual harassment when (1) submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual's employment, or (2) submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting such individual.

What is "hostile environment" sexual harassment?
Unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature constitute "hostile environment" sexual harassment when such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.

What factors determine whether an environment is "hostile?"
The central inquiry is whether the conduct "unreasonably interfered with an individual's work performance" or created "an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment." The EEOC will look at the following factors to determine whether an environment is hostile: (1) whether the conduct was verbal or physical or both; (2) how frequently it was repeated; (3) whether the conduct was hostile or patently offensive; (4) whether the alleged harasser was a co-worker or supervisor; (5) whether others joined in perpetrating the harassment; and (6) whether the harassment was directed at more than one individual. No one factor controls. An assessment is made based upon the totality of the circumstances.

What is unwelcome sexual conduct?
Sexual conduct becomes unlawful only when it is unwelcome. The challenged conduct must be unwelcome in the sense that the employee did not solicit or incite it, and in the sense that the employee regarded the conduct as undesirable or offensive.

How will the EEOC determine whether conduct is unwelcome?
When confronted with conflicting evidence as to whether conduct was welcome, the EEOC will look at the record as a whole and at the totality of the circumstances, evaluating each situation on a case by case basis. The investigation should determine whether the victim's conduct was consistent, or inconsistent, with his/her assertion that the sexual conduct was unwelcome.

Who can be a victim of sexual harassment?
The victim may be a woman or a man. The victim does not have to be of the opposite sex. The victim does not have to be the person harassed but could be anyone affected by the offensive conduct.