Slashdot Mirror

The DOD was instrumental in forming the basis of the internet, DARPA-NET

Man, I remember when it was a secret network.

No. No you evidently don't.

Please note, though, that this has nothing to do with making faster Si-based MOSFETs (i.e. smaller transistors). If you're interested in that, look here, here (great story), or here to see just a handful of the ideas people have. With all of these things in development, don't expect anything to overtake Si as the dominant technology for a long, long time (~10 years, maybe even). ;-)

It's a great idea (and ameliorates the excess cow problem as well). Unfortunately, in some studies we performed for BARPA (Bovine Advanced Research Projects Agency) a while back we encountered some serious technical problems:

1. Coefficient of Drag: The average cow's drag coefficient (even in the most aerodynamically efficient "ass-backwards" posture) is approximately 0.6, as compared to 0.02 for a well-designed streamlined warhead. Since terminal velocity scales with square root of drag coefficient in the high-velocity limit, and kinetic kill energy scales with velocity squared, this yields a 30-fold reduction in energy on target.
2. Density: The density of a typical Hereford is 1.1 grams per cubic centimeter. In contrast, the density of depleted uranium is closer to 19 grams per cubic centimeter. The 19-fold reduction in gravitation force then reduces terminal velocity by 19 times, with a consequent 19-fold reduction in kinetic energy on-target (assuming drag force proportional to velocity squared).
3. Ablation: The real killer here is premature ablation of the bovine carapace. Reentry from 400,000 feet can raise the temperature of the cow's exterior surfaces to 3000 K. First off, the water evaporates, then the fats burn off, leaving a dessicated cinder. Even worse the density of the resulting cow cinder is greatly reduced, reducing terminal velocity further. The only advantage here is the nice sizzling barbeque smell that permeates the stratosphere on reentry.

That said, of course we recommended further study.

Not only that, but I don't think DARPA would take too kindly to being called "a bunch of hippie anarchists."

One of the "interesting" properties about biological weapons (from a security standpoint) is that, despite what you hear about "gene" patenting, much of the information you need to set about doing something "not-so-nice" is obtainable, and much of the raw materials you would need can be had w/o too much trouble (compared to say, bomb grade radioactive material).

For example, (for now) you can download DNA sequence information for various pathogens from the NIH (variola, ebola, et cetera). (although there are rumors that these sequences have already been "edited", i.e., you guys better start downloading potentially risky sequence information now and start mirroring before it's "pacified" or just simply censored).

couple this sort of information to the large scale dna synthesizers that exist today (e.g., here or here) that almost anybody can buy for around $100,000...

add in a bunch of "sex on steroids" strategies for mutating stuff in the lab (e.g., molecular breeding of viruses) just to overcome any prophylatic modifcations made by the notional "they"...

et cetera. the simple fact is biology is hackable, and we're gonna have to learn how to deal with it. no you can't easily make ebola for cheap from scratch today, but the day when you can isn't far off.

so, it's not surprising that people are concerned about this. the DoD seems to be taking some decent first steps. for example, one recent DARPA program whose goal is to synthesize arbitrary 10,000 nucleotide fragments of DNA within a 24-hour response period (see here, section 2.1 of the first word document) only really makes sense in the context of a rapid-response DNA vaccination program.

It seems like (at least) one other obvious thing that needs to happen soonish is for one (or more) of the national labs to establish large scale conventional vaccination production capability.

Nice to see that DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) is still funding useful things like this. Remember that they funded the internet when it first started. They're usually up to something interesting.

UCAV is old news -- a 40-year-old dream finally being realized. Now Micro Air Vehicles (MAVs) are a more recent and much more interesting dream that is also being realized.

Most laptops weigh about twice this much! The exception are the ultralight notebooks, that are generally little more than puffed up PDAs. (which is really about all most of us really need, but that's another issue..)

DARPA has been funding a lot of research over the last few years with the hope of finding a viable power source for their urban soldier armored suits (among other projects)... I'd be surprised if this didn't spin out of some of that.

yes encryption IS a good thing for people like NIST to put resources into. You need people at the top of the field, and it helps that the organization's interests fall right in line with having an open, secure encryption system.

Sandia researchers develop world's fastest encryptor

ORNL Helps Develop Electronic Notebooks (read article to see crypto stuff)

GRIP -- Gigabit Rate IPSec (Army)

Cancer research (I never knew cancer genes needed encryption)

WING (DARPA)

NASA (why can't they look to NIST?)

Key Agile ATM (DARPA)

And theres a slew more. I agree that government should promote better standards, but instead of spending X millions on a bunch of bs, they should look to consolidate it all, which is what my main post should've stated I guess. Some of this so called research, or development never even sees the light of day due to timing situations. One part of government may intend to develop and deploy something, but it won't always happen, meaning all that money used for those projects are now gone, and they're left to ask for more money for some new project, never using their own resources to see if another agency can assist them.

yes encryption IS a good thing for people like NIST to put resources into. You need people at the top of the field, and it helps that the organization's interests fall right in line with having an open, secure encryption system.

Sandia researchers develop world's fastest encryptor

ORNL Helps Develop Electronic Notebooks (read article to see crypto stuff)

GRIP -- Gigabit Rate IPSec (Army)

Cancer research (I never knew cancer genes needed encryption)

WING (DARPA)

NASA (why can't they look to NIST?)

Key Agile ATM (DARPA)

And theres a slew more. I agree that government should promote better standards, but instead of spending X millions on a bunch of bs, they should look to consolidate it all, which is what my main post should've stated I guess. Some of this so called research, or development never even sees the light of day due to timing situations. One part of government may intend to develop and deploy something, but it won't always happen, meaning all that money used for those projects are now gone, and they're left to ask for more money for some new project, never using their own resources to see if another agency can assist them.

yes encryption IS a good thing for people like NIST to put resources into. You need people at the top of the field, and it helps that the organization's interests fall right in line with having an open, secure encryption system.

Sandia researchers develop world's fastest encryptor

ORNL Helps Develop Electronic Notebooks (read article to see crypto stuff)

GRIP -- Gigabit Rate IPSec (Army)

Cancer research (I never knew cancer genes needed encryption)

WING (DARPA)

NASA (why can't they look to NIST?)

Key Agile ATM (DARPA)

And theres a slew more. I agree that government should promote better standards, but instead of spending X millions on a bunch of bs, they should look to consolidate it all, which is what my main post should've stated I guess. Some of this so called research, or development never even sees the light of day due to timing situations. One part of government may intend to develop and deploy something, but it won't always happen, meaning all that money used for those projects are now gone, and they're left to ask for more money for some new project, never using their own resources to see if another agency can assist them.

It would be great for military networks

yeah, The military is already trying to do this with their Small Unit Operation Sutuaiton awareness system, which I've also seen referenced asa Blobal Mobile Information Systems. Essentially, each soldier gets a luggable device that forms an ad-hoc, peer-to-peer communication system that can keep squads/platoons/whatever in contact, while at the same time resisting enemy interference. While this may never fly in a battlefield environment, it probably will fly in downtown urban areas.

http://www.microopticalcorp.com/Products/

http://web-ext2.darpa.mil/mTO/Displays/HMD/Project s/ammi.html

It's odd that this just made it into the media, as this project (known as SUO SAS) has been around for the better part of 2 years now--not counting the previous phases of development, which go back several more years.

While the article got a lot of things right, it was also a good portion of hype. I worked on the networking software for this (which is built on top of the TAO CORBA ORB, btw), and while it is conceivable that it might scale up to 10,000 nodes, it is unlikely to do so in it's current form (well, as of a few months ago, anyway). In fact, we faced more or less the same scalability problems that any ad-hoc wireless network system faces, plus the added complexities of having to guarantee consistent tactical picture maintenance (how do you keep a consistent data 'picture' of an entire battlefied among 10,000 separated nodes, with no guarantees on connectivity, or even addressing between any two particular nodes? Now, how do you tackle message-based quality-of-service on top of this mess?). So, for those of you wondering, the problem tackled by this system is a lot bigger and more complicated that than faced by peer-to-peer filesharing systems (think superset of the gnutella problem), and the algorithms we were developing weren't perfect--or even good, necessarily. The problems facing ad-hoc networking are certainly as unsolved and difficult as they were before.

Another important note is that while we ultimately got our way and were able to use Linux for development (partly because we absolutely refused to work with a platform where we didn't have access to the network stack code), it was kind of an uphill battle with DARPA to do so. Linux still isn't qualified to be running on any type of deployed military system, and believe me, we heard about it constantly (I still shudder at the thought of trying to do our development in Windows...)

All that said, the concept of the project was/is pretty cool, but, as always, reality is less dramatic than its press release. If you want more info on the project and related research, here are some links:

Info on geo-routing algorithms (directly relevant to the SUO SAS problem)

A blurb on SUO SAS by SRI

The DARPA ATO web page describing SUO SAS

A central problem is that all the efficiencies possible in a large-scale network are lost without some aggregation, some centralization. Kleinrock worked a bit on the idea of allowing groups of soldiers to cluster together to form temporary hubs close to where additional bandwidth was necessary, but the problem is extraordinarily difficult both mathematically and physically--it's taken a long time for systems to get small enough for the research to be feasible.

Moreover, ARPA/IPTO/ITO really lost steam around the 80's, when Bob Kahn stepped down (no offense, Saul). And they didn't have no Linux, neither. So maybe the time is right, now.

--

DARPA is trying to advance what's already available - and advances in security would be great. I suspect they will be able to make advances, since they're planning to spend $10 million on the winning proposals. As has been noted, OpenBSD is not a perfect solution - its packages are often quite old and it has many functionality limits (e.g., no support for SMP). It also doesn't meet the principle of "least privilege" - root is still all-powerful, programs can do anything their owners can, etc.

The deadline is soon for those interested in submitting a proposal. The full proposal (all copies) must be submitted in time to reach DARPA by 4:00 PM (U.S. Eastern Time) Monday, March 5, 2001, in order to be considered; it CANNOT be sent by email or fax (they REQUIRE PHYSICAL COPIES).

People interested in submitting a proposal should also read the Proposer Information Pamphlet (PIP), which isn't easy to find unless you know where it is.

My mini robot can target your mini-robot for a mini-smart bomb strike.

When I went to see if I could find pictures elsewhere I came across this link as the top match. Not quite an "anime hardsuit" but still interesting.

I think the idea is to have lots of these things running around because they're so cheap. Sure some will get stuck or destroyed, but the majority will survive. You can see from this picture how small (check out the size of the chips relative to the overall size) and inexpensive it must be.

Here's a picture of the guts of the thing (which in government-speak, they call "Long Range Mesoscale Mobile Hopping Platform". Guess "hopper" doesn't cut it for the bureaucrats.)

Two points:

In my early 20's (ca 1982), I did a lot of private work on improved artifical limbs - until a worried friend (a lawyer) did a search of the case law to show me what a liability minefield it was. [1]

However, if cybernetic augmentaion really rocks your boat, you need to keep up on the DARPA and other government RFPs.

First up on the sci-fi drooler's hit parade is: "Exoskeletons for Human Performance Augmentation"-- a current active DARPA RFP, but if you miss the deadline, don't worry, there's similar RFPs every funding cycle.

I only wish they hadn't said ``DARPA is soliciting devices and machines that accomplish one or more of the following: ... 3) increase locomotive speed, 4) augment human strength, and 5) leap extraordinary heights and/or distances.''


In other words... faster than a speeding bullet, more powerful than a locomotive, able to leap tall buildings in a single bound...

------------------------
[1] In her somewhat irreverent words: "People who lost limbs as adults (due to the nature of the interface I used) and can afford to pay for an experimental limb? Er - sounds like someone who just won multimillion dollar lawsuit, to me. Don't mess with them, they already have a legal team!"

The case law seemed to bear her out.

Tim Berners-Lee and James Hendler is working on DAML- The DARPA Agent Markup Language. Most of the AI guys (that I know) that are doing web stuff are writing spider/crawlers. The interesting ones are using RDF and XML spiders to be able to search by content, rather than keyword.

News for Nerds, right? So if like high-tech, go check out what DARPA is currently funding. Remember, high risk, but the potential for high paybacks. For HMD resolutions check out this project.

Hmmm, just had an interesting thought. DARPA played a major role in the development of the internet. DARPA obviously also funds other seriously high-tech projects. Why isn't there more DARPA stories posted here? Perhaps it is time to change to the more politically correct name, ARPA? Note to some ppl, DARPA and ARPA are the same, only the name has been changed to appease the political gods of funding.

Side note, I don't know why the DARPA web site wants to give me cookies some of the time.

News for Nerds, right? So if like high-tech, go check out what DARPA is currently funding. Remember, high risk, but the potential for high paybacks. For HMD resolutions check out this project.

Hmmm, just had an interesting thought. DARPA played a major role in the development of the internet. DARPA obviously also funds other seriously high-tech projects. Why isn't there more DARPA stories posted here? Perhaps it is time to change to the more politically correct name, ARPA? Note to some ppl, DARPA and ARPA are the same, only the name has been changed to appease the political gods of funding.

Side note, I don't know why the DARPA web site wants to give me cookies some of the time.

MEMS (Micro Eletromechanical Systems).

I belive this is the project you are looking for: 10 Gbyte Personal Multimedia MEMS ROM Data Storage Card.

There is a fun index of projects here.

MEMS (Micro Eletromechanical Systems).

I belive this is the project you are looking for: 10 Gbyte Personal Multimedia MEMS ROM Data Storage Card.

There is a fun index of projects here.

MEMS (Micro Eletromechanical Systems).

I belive this is the project you are looking for: 10 Gbyte Personal Multimedia MEMS ROM Data Storage Card.

There is a fun index of projects here.

They have some of the slides used in their presentation on their web site. Lots of other informatian as well including many links to numerous MEMS related research projects.

My favourite must be the wrist communicator (Star Trek!) and the delta-wing control system which allowed the plane model to do a 1-wing-span-radius turn by identifying and then altering critical areas of flow on the leading edge of the wing.

It is possible that off the shelf MEMS devices may be available within the next decade - maybe sooner. And I mean realy sophisticated stuff, not counting easily standarised components like accelerometers and ink-jets which are already in commercial use.

However it may be, I have the distinct feeling that MEMS will alter the future of micro-electronic systems...

...by the pricking of my thumbs,

They have some of the slides used in their presentation on their web site. Lots of other informatian as well including many links to numerous MEMS related research projects.

My favourite must be the wrist communicator (Star Trek!) and the delta-wing control system which allowed the plane model to do a 1-wing-span-radius turn by identifying and then altering critical areas of flow on the leading edge of the wing.

It is possible that off the shelf MEMS devices may be available within the next decade - maybe sooner. And I mean realy sophisticated stuff, not counting easily standarised components like accelerometers and ink-jets which are already in commercial use.

However it may be, I have the distinct feeling that MEMS will alter the future of micro-electronic systems...

...by the pricking of my thumbs,

They have some of the slides used in their presentation on their web site. Lots of other informatian as well including many links to numerous MEMS related research projects.

My favourite must be the wrist communicator (Star Trek!) and the delta-wing control system which allowed the plane model to do a 1-wing-span-radius turn by identifying and then altering critical areas of flow on the leading edge of the wing.

It is possible that off the shelf MEMS devices may be available within the next decade - maybe sooner. And I mean realy sophisticated stuff, not counting easily standarised components like accelerometers and ink-jets which are already in commercial use.

However it may be, I have the distinct feeling that MEMS will alter the future of micro-electronic systems...

...by the pricking of my thumbs,

There's also a site here, courtesy of DARPA. Not that much there (looks like a corporate, rather than research site, IMHO), but a related links page I haven't followed completely, if you're interested.

I think the original post for this article is a little confused. "MEMS" is an acronym for "Microelectromechanical systems," which spans a broad range of nano-tech applications-- including perhaps nano-computing devices. But the canonical application-- accelerometers for car airbags-- have been in use for some time now. Bet you never even knew you were already using nano-tech, huh? :-)

Al Pisano is a very smart guy, and he will be missed. If any of you have an opportunity to see him speak, and are interested in this sort of thing, it's likely to be interesting.

----
We all take pink lemonade for granted.

Albert Pisano, the outgoing DARPA program manager for MEMS, likes to talk about building a MEMS dandelion seed, a few mm in diameter. (I saw him deliver the talk at GWU, and he's also given it at NIST.) With current process technology, an old processor like the 8088 would easily fit in that space; in fact, you could get a few hundred 8088s in that space, so computational power isn't a problem. Add power generation, sensors, and radio communications, and you're on to something!

I work on software for a MEMS-related project (the MEMS Exchange). It's an interesting field, and one that's already having an impact in specialized areas like accelerometers, and is very close to becoming widespread.

Albert Pisano, the outgoing DARPA program manager for MEMS, likes to talk about building a MEMS dandelion seed, a few mm in diameter. (I saw him deliver the talk at GWU, and he's also given it at NIST.) With current process technology, an old processor like the 8088 would easily fit in that space; in fact, you could get a few hundred 8088s in that space, so computational power isn't a problem. Add power generation, sensors, and radio communications, and you're on to something!

I work on software for a MEMS-related project (the MEMS Exchange). It's an interesting field, and one that's already having an impact in specialized areas like accelerometers, and is very close to becoming widespread.

Albert Pisano, the outgoing DARPA program manager for MEMS, likes to talk about building a MEMS dandelion seed, a few mm in diameter. (I saw him deliver the talk at GWU, and he's also given it at NIST.) With current process technology, an old processor like the 8088 would easily fit in that space; in fact, you could get a few hundred 8088s in that space, so computational power isn't a problem. Add power generation, sensors, and radio communications, and you're on to something!

I work on software for a MEMS-related project (the MEMS Exchange). It's an interesting field, and one that's already having an impact in specialized areas like accelerometers, and is very close to becoming widespread.

Actually, today we're celebrating the birth of the ARPANET, which preceeded the Internet.

The ARPANET was born on this day in 1968, and was finally laid to rest in March of 1991 when the IMPs (subsequently called Packet Switch Nodes (PSNs)) were finally decommissioned (long live 1822!).

The Internet was born on January 1, 1983 when the ARPANET was switched from Network Control Protocol (NCP) to the TCP/IP that we know today with not-so-gentle prodding from what was then the Defense Communications Agency (DCA, now the Defense Information Systems Agency), which had taken over operation of the ARPANET from the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA).

Before that day, you had to have a computer attached to an IMP on the ARPANET to be on the network. After that day, with a router, you could be on any old LAN, and exchange IP packets with any other host anywhere, whether it was attached to an IMP, an Ethernet, a Chaosnet, an ARCnet, or whatever. The growth of the network accelerated from that point on to the world-embracing network we see today.

Now, if we can just get IP version 6 (and IP Security!) deployed to solve the address space problem. Unfortunately, we don't have any one organization with control over the Internet who can cause such a change to happen (i.e. they order it, and they have guns to back it up their authority).

Of course, there are anarchists who say that this is better...