Slashdot Mirror


Junkyard Wars: The Next Generation

A reader writes: "The makers of Junkyard Wars are starting up a new series called Ultimate Machine Combat. 30 teams and 30 days each to build "ultimate fighting vehicle" to battle in a "secret arena". This is attracting gear heads of all genres, including my local Jeep Club."

297 comments

  1. Death? by Kallahar · · Score: 5, Funny
    "Each week, three teams enter the arena but only one team lives to fight another day."

    Wow, that is ultimate.

    1. Re:Death? by wo1verin3 · · Score: 4, Funny

      If this IS to the death, I'd like to see contestants from Tempation Island and Survivor apply.

    2. Re:Death? by fobbman · · Score: 5, Funny

      This just BEGS for a celebrity version, if it is truly to the death.

      I vote Carrot Top on his own team.

    3. Re:Death? by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 2

      Say what you want about Carrot Top, but he must have a HELL of an agent. How does this guy get work?? He either has robo-agent, or a huge investigative staff to dig up dirt on potential clients.

      Maybe someone could sneak up on him sometime and shave off all the hair. Maybe like Samson he will lose all his career power if the hair is gone.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    4. Re:Death? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      then you can type in overly long command sequences with archaic options to do things like turn the vehicle.

      The Linux way:
      ~$ turn -d 45

      The Windows way:
      Double click on turn, drag the direction widget until it is set to 45 degrees, click on OK, and then click on Yes in the verification prompt.

      Which would you rather use?

    5. Re:Death? by swordboy · · Score: 3, Funny

      If this IS to the death, I'd like to see contestants from Tempation Island and Survivor apply.

      Temptation Bots? Survivor Wars?

      You have to admit - this is the best of Battle Bots *and* JYW...

      --

      Life is the leading cause of death in America.
    6. Re:Death? by daeley · · Score: 4, Funny

      Say what you want about Carrot Top, but he must have a HELL of an agent. How does this guy get work??

      I think you answered your own question. He *does* have a HELL of an agent.

      --
      I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    7. Re:Death? by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1

      Touche... I think you hit on it. The only explanation.

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    8. Re:Death? by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Well his mom runs the comedy stand, where most of the saturday night live people, and many other famous comics got their start. So he's got connections.

    9. Re:Death? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would that be Mrs. Top?

    10. Re:Death? by alcmena · · Score: 2

      No no no... Pauley Shore should be on Carrot Top's team. :)

    11. Re:Death? by Com2Kid · · Score: 2

      ::groans::

      No no no.

      First off both sides would set up shorter methods of doing it.

      The Linux dudes would likely have scripts setup to do things quickly, typing T45 for instance for turning 45 degrees. Or even T for a ultra quick method. It would accept signed integers of course. :)

      The Windows people would likely be using their sidewinder controlers, heh. Or mice. Or just have a TON of shortcuts on their desktop linking to various different degrees that the bot could be turned too, heh. Then they would have to rush out and buy a bigger screen and hurry up and install that because their screens resolution would not be high enough to view all of their desktop shortcuts. :)

    12. Re:Death? by Pope · · Score: 1

      heh heh

      Meanwhile, us Mac folks would spend all our time coming up the ultimate Cocoa-based GUI for OS X that would work with a one button mouse and lots of command key shortcuts, but ultimately win because we encased the whole thing in bulletproof G4 cases! :)

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    13. Re:Death? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you really want to watch an hour of people standing around their robots crying all the time?

    14. Re:Death? by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

      "would work with a one button mouse and lots of command key shortcuts, "

      And then have troubles as 99.99% of the mac community would be unable to figure out what they keyboard thing is.

      Of the .001% that did realize how to use a keyboard, only half of them would realize that you could press more then one button at a time!

      And oh yah, PC users have far superior cases. :)

      My current $60 Full Tower ATX case can support over 200lbs of weight on top of it. How do I know? Simple, I have used it as a stepping stool before. :)

      "Cocoa-based GUI for OS X"

      I do hope that you remember to turn off all of the eye candy, or else you could have some serious issues for say. . . . Window resizing? (man, even win2k could do this outa the box, LOL)

    15. Re:Death? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Linux way:
      ~$ turn -d 45


      The Windows way:
      Double click on turn, drag the direction widget until it is set to 45 degrees, click on OK, and then click on Yes in the verification prompt.


      You now need to enter your 24 digit regestration key and reboot windows to complete your turn. Do you want to reboot now?

    16. Re:Death? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Please. The real Linux way:

      1. Attempt to install the "GNU/XTurn" application via RPM.
      2. Watch it crap out with no useful errors.
      3. Download the source.
      4. ./configure --prefix=/usr/bin/turn
      5. make. It craps out.
      6. Start hunting for the dependencies that were totally undocumented.
      7. Install dependencies. Discover that they have unfulfilled dependencies.
      8. Install the dependency dependencies. It actually works.
      9. Run to the original 'make' command again.
      10. After thirty-six minutes of compilation, it craps out because of an incorrect version of an obscure library.
      11. Spend two hours hunting for an updated version and installing.
      12. Re-run 'make' again.
      13. Fourty-nine minutes later, it is done.
      14. 'make install'
      15. Hooray! "GNU/XTurn" runs like a charm and is stable in 15 easy steps and three days!

      Sadly, the Junkyard Wars competition has been over for two weeks. This, of course, leads us to the 16th step:

      16. Having been left in the dust again, whine to zealots of Slashdot about how Microsoft unfairly moved the Junkyard Wars competition up by two weeks.

      And that, friends, is real life with Linux. I have left out the sub-steps of each parent step in the interest of brevity.

      /tmomn

    17. Re:Death? by _ph1ux_ · · Score: 2

      and brendan frasier, rosie o'donnell and roseanne bar.

      GO DREAM TEAM!!
      .

    18. Re:Death? by joekool · · Score: 1

      I thought that was Pauly Shore?
      although in many ways, the two are interchangable

      --

      Slackware: old school feel, new school gear.
    19. Re:Death? by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Yea, I think your right, sorry for the misinformation. Hmm, looking for info on carrot-top can't find much of a bio.

  2. Looks like somebody by satsuke · · Score: 1

    Looks like somebody got a huge budget increase.

    Or a large pile of good junk

  3. One problem... by SGDarkKnight · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm all for junkyeard wars and all, but i don't think they should let people spend more on the machine that what they are allocated. This just means that someone will probably go and get some rich sponsor to give them a wack load of money, then hire some nasa engineers to design and build the machine.

    On the other hand, I can't wait to see the competition, should be really intresting.

    --

    ...A no smoking section in a restaurant is like having a no peeing section in a swimming pool...
    1. Re:One problem... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, actually they couldnt be finished in time if they hired NASA engineers, would they ??

      /Peter
      oh2 -*nospamhereorelse*- telia.com

  4. cool..but by Em+Emalb · · Score: 3, Funny

    Will they get the idiots from Comedy Central to do "insightful" interviews like on Battle bots?

    Interviewer: "So, what possessed you to build this thing?"

    Interviewee: "Carmen Electra. I am a geek, and there's no chance of me getting close to her otherwise."

    Speaking of Carmen Electra...ahhh..nevermind, I'm finished ;)

    --
    Sent from your iPad.
    1. Re:cool..but by Cutriss · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Just as long as they don't get that asshole from "Robotica" to do it.

      Robotica is *okay* on its own merits, but if he hosted Battlebots or Junkyard Wars, that'd totally ruin the show by itself.

      --
      "Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
    2. Re:cool..but by Pastor+Fluff · · Score: 3, Funny

      Seeing as Kryten has a Junk 'em show (Scrapheap Challenge) and Lister has a Bot show (Robot Wars UK)...

      I've got it!!! Cat!!!!

      --
      Bubble, bubble, toil and trouble... can't we just go to Starbuck's for coffee?
    3. Re:cool..but by daeley · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah, Carmen is cool to look at, but she doesn't hold a candle to the beautiful, brainy, and British Cathy Rogers.

      --
      I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    4. Re:cool..but by UberOogie · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Carmen Electra has ruined BattleBots.

      Sure, she looks nice in a generic and souless kind of way, but at least the other BattleBot bimbos they had in previous seasons could fake enthusiasm in a somewhat believable way. Electra just stands there, stock still, with the microphone in the spokesmodel position, and then whores herself out monotone. You can tell she is just doing it for the money and hates being there.

      And now, the show has become Carmen Electra & Battlebots. She is in every segment. They talk about her, get her to do interviews, or cut to her in the stands so she can say one line, and then cut back to the booth so they can make some sexual innuendo about her one line.

      Sad.

      Okay, I'm done now.

      Yeah, we're OT at this point, but I'm capped. Go crazy.

      --
      "Enough of this wretched, whining monkey life." -- Marcus Aurelius, _Meditations_, Book 9, 37
    5. Re:cool..but by daeley · · Score: 3, Informative

      Ahmet Zappa is an acquired taste, to be sure, but he has toned down since last season. We grew to love the antics after a while. (One particular, ah, 'manuever' of his became a family meme: saying 'Robotica-style' and making convoluted hand motions.) He's the son of Frank Zappa, by the way, which might explain a bit ;-) and brother to Moon Unit and Dweezil.

      --
      I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    6. Re:cool..but by Fishstick · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >cut back to the booth so they can make some sexual innuendo about her one line

      Yahknow, I'm up for a good double-entendre as much as the next guy, but these are forced and unfunny. Plus, I like to watch this show with my kids, and I crindge now everytime they cut to Carmen.

      Notice how they cut to her a lot and she doesn't have anything interesting to say? She 'interviews' the contenstants after the bout:

      So, you guys really 'creamed' them, didn't you *wink,wink*?

      Heh, yah... he's a really good driver, and we just tried to keep_

      OK, thanks! Back to you, Bill!


      Give me Cathy Rogers *any* day.

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    7. Re:cool..but by Winged+Cat · · Score: 1

      Nah. Rimmer for this one (ultra-secret, pseudo-military ops). Save Cat for the one that happens in some big metro's downtown.

      Ok, ok, I'm typecasting, I know...

    8. Re:cool..but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      haven't watched battlebots in a while. now that she is an announcer, I might watch it :-P

    9. Re:cool..but by SilentChris · · Score: 2
      I don't know, man. I think ever since Battlebots went to Comedy Central it's been ruined.

      Daily Show I like. Beat the Geeks I'll tolerate. But the new Battlebots is just sad.

    10. Re:cool..but by Cutriss · · Score: 2

      Where was it before Comedy Central? I thought it was a ComCen original show.

      --
      "Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
    11. Re:cool..but by JacobO · · Score: 1

      I didn't see the first season, but if that is "toned down" then I'm glad I didn't. I don't think he's an asshole or anything, but he gets in the way of what is an otherwise great show.

      Got to give him some credit for being a Zappa. Frank was the man.

    12. Re:cool..but by fireant · · Score: 2

      Do yourself a favor and check out this link. It's a timeline that discusses the history of Robot Wars, which originated in California (not the UK), and the origins of Battlebots and Robotica. It's a very interesting read about a wide-eyed geek and the corporations that ate him up and spit him out.

    13. Re:cool..but by dmforcier · · Score: 1

      I have to quibble. You point about turning Battlebots into "The Carmen Electra Show" is well taken. But if you examine the way her shots are assembled (hint: look at the outfits) you can dope out the time line of when they were shot.

      It's apparent that Carmen started out doing her best spokesmodel imitation (which actually isn't bad for a spokesmodel), but then saw what everyone was there for (mayhem!) and started getting genuinely excited (hint: look a bit closer at her outfit).

      My own quibble with the show - WHY does the director frame up a shot of Carmen and her electric boobies, then immediately paste an opaque title over her chest? Isn't that defeating the whole purpose of having here there?!?

      --
      You can't take the sky from me!
    14. Re:cool..but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No way dude, Ahmet is MUCH better than the numbnut on "Robot Wars". And they put him with the babe from the DirecTV help channel. Mrrrrrowww.

  5. But an unlimited budget? by Nijika · · Score: 1

    Imagine what they could come up with! I'd love to see that.

    --
    Luck favors the prepared, darling.
    1. Re:But an unlimited budget? by Leven+Valera · · Score: 2

      Doesn't say unlimited, says they'll give you some cash. And as for combat, from reading the article, I don't think it's combat ala Robotica + Battlebots, but more demolition derby sort of thing.

      LV

      --
      Woot w00t w007.
    2. Re:But an unlimited budget? by DevNull+Ogre · · Score: 1

      It is unlimited. From the FAQ:

      Q: Can I spend some of my own money on my vehicle?

      Yes - you may spend as much as you like. You don't have to spend anything since we will provide enough money for a basic vehicle and bear in mind that your finished vehicle may not survive the competition.


      (my emphasis in bold)

    3. Re:But an unlimited budget? by JacobO · · Score: 1

      I'm with you. I thought that was one of the best parts of the deal! And all that time to make it too, I am hoping they will get a chance to be ambitious/creative AND finish their construction. Unlike Junkyard Wars where the more interesting ideas usually lose for the team.

  6. Dangerous? by Geeyzus · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I am assuming, since this is coming from the Junkyard Wars standpoint and not necessarily Battlebots, are these vehicles manned?

    And if so, there have to be some pretty strict regulations. Is this going to be a demolition derby or a large-scale battlebots war with pneumatic spikes and huge sawblades ripping cars apart? Obviously any humans in the ring would be in serious danger. So I have to imagine these things are unmanned.

    This is probably then 1 of 3 possibilities:
    • Manned cars, but the safety regulations will turn this into a glorified demolition derby... *yawn*
    • Unmanned cars, so a huge-scale battlebots thing.... pretty cool, and very expensive... cool to watch I'm sure. But I doubt this is the format.
    • Unmanned, small remote control cars.... so, Battlebots. But why would they re-do Battlebots???
    My thoughts are, that this will be a really cool, dangerous show, or a boring Battlebots ripoff... hard to tell from the website.

    Mark
    1. Re:Dangerous? by EricWright · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, the FAQ says the vehicle must accomodate a roll cage. Pretty useless unless someone is going to be *in* the thing.

      Eric

    2. Re:Dangerous? by MindStalker · · Score: 1

      Well it does mention that you are required to have one member with racing experience. So yea, I'm thinking demolition derby.

    3. Re:Dangerous? by debiansierra · · Score: 2, Informative

      if you RTFA (which apparently you did with a lack of attention) you'd know that it's gonna be manned because your three man team requires a person with diving/racing skills/experience.

      --
      I would like some milk from the milkman's wife's tits
    4. Re:Dangerous? by TMLink · · Score: 1

      Did you see Junkyard Mega Wars? There were 3 teams that built machines in 2 days to race against each other in 3 races: a speed race, a hill climbing race, and a water race. From the FAQ itself (whoops, forgot to actually read again, huh?), they do a comparison to that show. Of course, my hope would be that the courses are a lot tougher or just completely different than they were for that show...but that's probably a direction they're going for.

      Though, it would be pretty cool to turn this into some kind of Mad Max deathmatch...but I guess we can't always get what we want.

      --
      Every time a guy gets a threesome, somewhere in heaven an angel gets his wings. --Cary Tennis
    5. Re:Dangerous? by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Interesting
      • I am assuming, since this is coming from the Junkyard Wars standpoint and not necessarily Battlebots, are these vehicles manned? [...] Unmanned cars, so a huge-scale battlebots thing.... pretty cool, and very expensive... cool to watch I'm sure. But I doubt this is the format.

      Doubt ye not. There was a Scrapheap Challenge (the original UK title) battle of the champions event in the UK using exactly this format. Two salvage cars, radio controlled with salvaged motors turning the wheels and pushing the pedals, and just ramming the bejeesus out of each other in an old quarry.

      It was splendidly entertaining, with a few flaws that could easily be ironed out (i.e. don't put a high scoring scoring target area on the top of the car then count any old trailing bit of chain that hits it). Both teams tried to put clever weapons on their vehicles, but ended up just smashing lumps out of each other, which is what we really want to see, right?

      You're right about the safety aspect though. One of the cars jammed on full throttle, and they had to drive it in circles, then up the quarry wall until it tipped over. A bit scary for the production crew, but top fun for the viewers.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    6. Re:Dangerous? by mumkin · · Score: 1
      Hey, funny you should mention that. I was just looking at the Junkyard Wars episode guide, and the Season 6 championship (airing February 20th on TLC) is your option 2, albeit with only 10 hours to build, so not as super kickass as it could be:

      Car Jousting

      The champions' challenge is to take an ordinary car and convert it into a radio-controlled fighting machine. Points are scored for hitting targets on the opposing machine: 10 for a sideswipe, 20 for a rear-ender, and 30 for hammering the roof. If a machine strays outside the ring, it gives away 50 points to the other side. The team with the highest total score after three rounds is the winner.

      Note that 30 points are awarded for "hammering the roof" so they're making allowances for vehicles with robot-like arms and whatnot.
  7. Pro-Wrasslin' for Geeks by Bonker · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Although I don't watch them very often... once or twice a month... I really like shows like Battlebots, Robotica, and Junkyard wars because they trigger the same emotional response in children as pro-sports, and even faux-sports like Professional Wrestling.

    Rather than be encouraged to spend all their time getting their bodies in peak/steroid-enhanced condition for the sport of their choice and then being completely burned out and unable to pursue any other line of work by the time they're an adult, kids are encouraged to learn mechanics, engineering, coding, and other tech skills that will benifit them later in life in professional or technical careers.

    --
    The next Slashdot story will be ready soon, but subscribers can beat the rush and slashdot the links early!
    1. Re:Pro-Wrasslin' for Geeks by Skyshadow · · Score: 2

      I assure you, watching a team saw a Land Rover in half triggers an entirely different response than watching a bunch of greased-up steroid cases yell at each other.

      --
      Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    2. Re:Pro-Wrasslin' for Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cutting a fine machine like a Land Rover in half would make me cry. Now, if it was some POS Chevy Suburban, then I just wouldn't care.

    3. Re:Pro-Wrasslin' for Geeks by PrimalChrome · · Score: 1
      Wow, how right you are!!!! Heavens forbid that these kids should go outside and get some sunlight and exercise.

      Surely you're aware that American youth are suffering from obscene levels of obesity and diabetes due to geeking out in front of TVs, game consoles and computers while munching on twinkies and jolt.

    4. Re:Pro-Wrasslin' for Geeks by Rogerborg · · Score: 2
      • kids are encouraged to learn mechanics, engineering, coding, and other tech skills that will benifit them later in life in professional or technical careers.

      I find Scrapheap Challenge (the original UK title of Junkyard Wars) very bitter sweet. One the one hand it's wonderful watching new toys being made, but on the other hand, the custom car builder in me wails in anguish at all those irreplacable and beautiful old donor vehicles being angle ground into pieces.

      I rather fear that general engineering skills are becoming niche hobbyist skills rather than valuable vocational tools. Sad, but that's progress, I suppose.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    5. Re:Pro-Wrasslin' for Geeks by Winged+Cat · · Score: 1

      Hate to break it to you (not), but part of the activities involve sunshine (what, you think you can properly test these things indoors? Barring stadiums or the like, but few people live there) and exercise (lifting stuff, especially heavy equipment).

    6. Re:Pro-Wrasslin' for Geeks by rhatcher · · Score: 2, Informative
      As much as I like Junkyard Wars, I dislike Battlebots, Robotica, etc. In Junkyard Wars the two teams build are generally competing on equal terms -- same amount of time, same resources (junkyard). We get to see them make decisions (good, bad and the ugly). There are little side bits about the theory behind some of those decisions, with commentary about what a wrong choice can mean. And the point of the competition isn't simply destructions and mayhem. I find that geeky fun. Simply crashing bots together with various whackers and mashers just doesn't have the same appeal.

      I let my four year old watch Junkyard Wars. Actually it's his favorite show! We have a bunch on tape (they had a marathon the day after Thanksgiving) and they hold up to repeat viewing. He's probably seen each episode six to ten times.

      But there is no way is he allowed the death-and-destruction bot shows. From what I've seen of them, I fail to see where kids are:

      encouraged to learn mechanics, engineering, coding, and other tech skills that will benifit them later in life in professional or technical careers.
      Well, other than in a very second hand fashion. Junkyard Wars on the other hand shows the teams in action using such skills on camera.

      I'm not all that encouraged by the description of the new show, but I guess I'll reserve judgement for now.

    7. Re:Pro-Wrasslin' for Geeks by I.T.R.A.R.K. · · Score: 0

      Okay, so your kid gets to go outside and sit on his ass. Same difference. ;)

      --

      "Adequacy.org: Where congenital stupidity is not an option, but a requirement."

    8. Re:Pro-Wrasslin' for Geeks by I.T.R.A.R.K. · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't you prefer your kid pursue these very interests for science in the name if discovery rather than the pursuit of science in the name of destroying things?
      Who knows..One day, your kid just might be the guy who designs a more effecient way for the military to murder people. Heh.

      --

      "Adequacy.org: Where congenital stupidity is not an option, but a requirement."

  8. Junk by Skyshadow · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Bah, it'd be a lot more cool if they have ten hours to build the machine in the junkyard.

    --
    Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    1. Re:Junk by gspeare · · Score: 5, Funny

      They did that show already. It was called "The A-Team".

    2. Re:Junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lol!!!

    3. Re:Junk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, did you think that all up by yourself?
      That was posted an hour earlier.

  9. EMP, the ultimate feature by iiii · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd love to see a "fighting vehicle" with EMP capabilities. WHAM, all computer components and electronics, like fuel injection, in the other vehicles are disabled. I win. Well, it would probably be silent, not WHAM. And it wouldn't make for great tv viewing, since it would melt all the equipment recording the scene. Still, that would rock. Wonder if the rules specifically prohibit such genius.

    --
    Light cup, beer drink, thin so chain, neck turtle fat, man I won't say it again
    1. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it is robotic or remote controled, your vehicle will be disabled as well. Not to mention you'll knock out all the video cameras as well. Even if you win, they won't ask you to come back. Might as well make a big bomb on wheels.

    2. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by iiii · · Score: 1

      If you're building a EMP weapon you know to shield all of your own electronics, so they'd survive just fine. No one else would have shielded electronics.

      --
      Light cup, beer drink, thin so chain, neck turtle fat, man I won't say it again
    3. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by Skyshadow · · Score: 3, Informative
      That's a pretty tall order.

      The EMP assemblies I've seen take up a lot of space for relatively poor performace -- the entire cargo area of a minibus in exchange for making some monitors flicker. I'm sure this could be miniturized, but I think you'd need something pretty serious to cook a car's electronics.

      If the arena's fairly small, you could use a couple of tanks of halon to give anyone using a gasoline engine a nasty shock -- suffocate the engine. Otherwise, I've seen a device in testing by the police that fires a contact under the chassis of a fleeing vehicle to make contact, hitting 'em with a jolt of juice. Car taser.

      --
      Every year during my review, I just pray the words "slashdot.org" aren't mentioned.
    4. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by geekoid · · Score: 2

      I saw a demonstration of an EMP device that was no larger then a pipe-bomb. It worked for about a 25 foot radius, certianly large enough to take out a competing vehical. And it did go WHAM. actually is was more like BANG, but you get the pisture, I just need to ramble to get past the 20 sec thing.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by (H)elix1 · · Score: 2

      I'd love to see a "fighting vehicle" with EMP capabilities.

      That would be a wee bit hard on the camera crew - well the equipment anyhow...

    6. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by alcmena · · Score: 2

      I saw one that had a directional antenna, was able to fit on an A/V cart, and was able to stall a car from 20 feet. Pretty cool, but kinda scary considering he built it using consumer parts and for less than 10k. There was some report about it on ABC News a year or two ago.

    7. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by Com2Kid · · Score: 1, Informative

      Why go with just some piddily little EMP? You can buy a friggin TANK from http://www.rusarm.ru

    8. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by dohcvtec · · Score: 1

      This is purely anecdotal, not to mention hearsay, but I recall that truckers with (illegally) powerful CB radios can potentially knock out nearby vehicles. The idea was that some truckers install (multi?) kilowatt radios powered by extra batteries and big alternators. I suppose modern vehicles with sensitive ECMs and such would be more vulnerable than say, 1960's technology. Maybe EMP and resistance thereof will be design criteria for the competition.

      --
      -- Never hit a man with glasses. Hit him with a baseball bat.
    9. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just remember to hold your package, ala Don Cheadle in the Ocean's Eleven remake.

    10. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gotta love that website! Now that is what I call a KILLER APP! *ba-dum-dum*

      I wonder if they do leases or layaways?

    11. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if they know EMP weapons are legal they'd shield their electronics also, no?

    12. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by hopews · · Score: 1

      A couple of tanks of halon would give the other drivers a nasty shock too. I doubt killing the other participants is allowed.

    13. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Halon? Couldn't the other guy just use a battery backup until the halon quickly cleared from moving the vehicle or wind?

      Cloud weapons are effective for only very brief times and even then only if there are no strong winds.

    14. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like a big capacitor or an exploding magnet for generating intense fluxes.

    15. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by jeremyp · · Score: 1

      Didn't you read the original story. Only one team *lives* to fight another day.

      I'm entering with a small but dirty nuclear warhead.

      Anybody got any plutonium for sale?

      --
      All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
    16. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by starman97 · · Score: 1

      Ya know, a pipebomb would also take out most electronics in a 25ft radius...

      --
      Starman97@Gmail.com (bring it on spammers)
    17. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by schon · · Score: 1

      I saw one that had a directional antenna, was able to fit on an A/V cart, and was able to stall a car from 20 feet.

      Sounds more like HERF (High Energy Radio Frequency) than EMP.

    18. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by King+of+the+World · · Score: 0
      I'm entering a large solid block of concrete.

      It'll be very difficult to lose, and hopefully the other team will run out of petrol.

      I keep the robot building money and spend it on a holiday to England. Hurrah!

    19. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by zeno_2 · · Score: 1

      Well, EMP weapons are probably legal, unless they have this long list of 'weapons' that aren't. I really don't see why everyone would be frantic to protect their vehicles from everything known to harm vehicles (think small explosives, superglue to keep it on one spot, that foam stuff they use for insulation, the list can go on and on). It would be pretty cool to see someone build a very basic vehicle that had a large hammer type thing on the top, and an EMP generating device. They could take all the vehicles out, and then just go around and pound them into the ground.

      Ah well, it should be fun to watch anyway..

    20. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

      Their Russian based.

      Why the hell would you need any sort of a payment program? Sheesh, a US McDonalds employee could likely afford kit from that place. :)

      (some assembly required? Just because I know somebody is going to make that joke. . . . :) )

    21. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, you forgot that the EMP would also fry your machine. Sorry, nice idea, but you'd even lose because the EMP would hit your vehicle first (it's inside the damn thing).

    22. Re:EMP, the ultimate feature by alcmena · · Score: 2

      Yep, you're right, my bad. Still makes electronic stuff have a very bad day.

  10. At last ... by Terao · · Score: 2, Funny

    A docusoap for techies. :-)

  11. Interesting by debiansierra · · Score: 1

    I'm thinking a Hummer would be pretty devastating if equipped with armor, tire protection, and.... exploding stuff (imagine outward-blasting charges that detonate on impact). they don't limit you on how you can "attack" the opposition. Is it like demolition derby in a pit or demolition derby on a track? Also, is it real? They want your info and they offer no privacy policy. I'll bet that track has water and mud so an amphibious vehicle with the equivalent of armored fender skirts could be a real winner. Damn, i'd love to go see the show, but i'll bet it's expensive since they actually finance the "vehicles".

    --
    I would like some milk from the milkman's wife's tits
    1. Re:Interesting by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      Damn, i'd love to go see the show, but i'll bet it's expensive since they actually finance the "vehicles".

      I think the point of the show is that you are given only limited finances to build this vehicle. They aren't giving you enough to go out and buy a brand new landrover or an armored assault vehicle.

      Think along the lines of Trading Spaces (I don't watch it but my girlfriend is obsessed). They give you $1,000 to redecorate the room.

    2. Re:Interesting by Sarcazmo · · Score: 1

      Hummer would be pretty devastating

      It sure was for Clinton's career.

    3. Re:Interesting by debiansierra · · Score: 1

      27 contesting vehicles. Wonder what kind of budget you get? I'm thinking ~$2000. But, anyway, you CAN supplement their contribution. Soooo, if you've got a spare hummer laying around they'll be helping you deck it out. :)

      --
      I would like some milk from the milkman's wife's tits
    4. Re:Interesting by seann · · Score: 1

      what part of
      "you can put in as much money as you want, but your creation might be destroyed afterwards." did you not read?

      --
      I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
    5. Re:Interesting by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      what part of

      original poster - "but i'll bet it's expensive since they actually finance the "vehicles"."

      and

      my post - "I think the point of the show is that you are given only limited finances to build this vehicle"

      did you not read?

      Dumbass, I never said anything about them restricting how much you can spend. I said they are only going to give you a limited amount of money. The site even says - "We will be giving you enough money to build a no-frills vehicle". So the cost to the show is a lot more limited than what the original poster assumed.

      Why don't you read the whole thread before posting you ignorant attempt at trolling?

    6. Re:Interesting by seann · · Score: 1

      I think the point of the show is that you are given only limited finances to build this vehicle. They aren't giving you enough to go out and buy a brand new landrover or an armored assault vehicle.

      --
      I'm a big retard who forgot to log out of Slashdot on Mike's computer! LOOK AT ME.
    7. Re:Interesting by RazzleFrog · · Score: 1

      Nice cut and paste without a point. I am not going to argue with a 14 yr old today.

      I will copy one word instead - GIVEN.

    8. Re:Interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to kill a joke with a technicality, but he served the maximum presidential term. Most presidents don't return to a career in politics after their term ends.

  12. Deadline past by Alrocket · · Score: 2, Informative
    This program is really cool, has been running this side of the pond for years.

    The deadline for sending in applications is Monday 28th January 2002.

    That's unfortunate timing, need to /. these things quicker in future :)

    Maybe if you can get enough /.ers interested and write to them (quickly) you might be able to extend it a week or so.

    JUNKYARD WARS APPLICATIONS
    RDF MEDIA
    14622 Ventura Blvd. #1017
    Sherman Oaks CA, 91403
    USA

    The application procedure is pretty cool :-)

    Al.

    1. Re:Deadline past by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Uhh, by the time our letters got there, it would be nearly a week from now. Pretty useless to write them snail mail and ask that.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    2. Re:Deadline past by pmcneill · · Score: 4, Informative

      That address and deadline is for Junkyard Wars (which has been running on both sides of the pond for years). The new program, Ultimate Machine Combat, has a Fed 15 application deadline and is a brand new show.

    3. Re:Deadline past by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 1

      Yes, specially this part:
      Find a recent photograph of each team member. Write each person's name, address, telephone number and team name on the back. Attach the correct photograph to each set of forms - this helps us put names to faces when we finally get to meet you.

      Translation: We want to make sure that you look like someone we would put on TV. While your skills might apply, there is no show stopper like the wrong looks.

    4. Re:Deadline past by Flerg · · Score: 1

      Translation: We want to make sure that you look like someone we would put on TV. While your skills might apply, there is no show stopper like the wrong looks.

      Have you seen the contestants on Junkyard Wars? I'm fairly certain that looks were a non-issue when they selected the contestants.

    5. Re:Deadline past by mks113 · · Score: 1

      I think it was best said "They have a face better suited for radio".

  13. Enough wimpy stuff.. by Mean_Nishka · · Score: 3, Funny
    I want missiles, explosives, and all out warfare! Hopefully as this mechanized destruction genre grows, we'll start seeing some extreme versions with projectiles, high explosives and pleny of gasoline.

    Enough of this panzy safety stuff :).

    1. Re:Enough wimpy stuff.. by GigsVT · · Score: 2

      Yeah, and maybe we could get some lions and Christians, and we would really be set!

      I'm surprised no one has though of this before!

      &lt/sarcasm&gt

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    2. Re:Enough wimpy stuff.. by 2Bits · · Score: 2

      Oh yeah, dude. Can I have all these on my car too? I'd like to throw some to those fucking drivers who cut you off on highway, so close that the tail of their car almost touches your car headlight, and without even signalling.

      Or does anyone have the recipe for that two-color gum in the movie Mission Impossible? That'll do too.

    3. Re:Enough wimpy stuff.. by bughunter · · Score: 1
      Well, I've welcomed the success of shows like Junkyard Wars, Battlebots, and the like, alongside the popularity of live televised police pursuits, and reality shows like Fear Factor and Maximum Exposure...

      The success of all of these genres brings us ever so much closer to the day when we'll have real Car Wars style autoduels. I still play Car Wars regularly after 20 years, and it never grows old.

      My only regret is that I can't mount even a paintball cannon to my Fnord Escort and take it out on the 210 freeway... much less a pair of 30mm Aden cannon.

      --
      I can see the fnords!
    4. Re:Enough wimpy stuff.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      s/christians/muslims/g

  14. Must fit in cargo container. by killthiskid · · Score: 2

    My first thought was to use the body of an M113 APC, but the vehicle must fit in a 8 x 8 x 20 cargo container for shipment to England. The vehicle can be disassembled for transport, but it has to be able to be put back together in under four hours. Damn!

    I drove APC for 5 years... and they can do some amazing things.

    1. Re:Must fit in cargo container. by VikingBerserker · · Score: 1

      Back in WWII, the Italians had a few very small tank designs, on the order of five tons and about the size of your typical Japanese econobox of today. From the footage I've seen, they were armored, small, fast, and very maneuverable.

      What's to stop somebody from buying two of these surplus and stuffing both in a shipping container (one for running, one for parts), and arming them with live ammunition? I foresee lots of pretty explosions, followed by arrest warrants posted on TheSmokingGun.com...

    2. Re:Must fit in cargo container. by jandrese · · Score: 2

      The FAQ suggested that the machine needs to be reliable. I don't think an Italian tank from the 1940s is going to cut it. I'd be amazed if you managed to keep the thing running long enough to snap a picture.

      --

      I read the internet for the articles.
    3. Re:Must fit in cargo container. by pa-guy · · Score: 1

      Na. Use a Lynx, the C&R variant that the Canadian Forces used to use. Much faster, more manouverable. There's a sketch at:http://www.activevr.com/afv/camouflage/lynx.htm l. I crewed one for years and it's got way more oumph than a 113. And it might fit in the shipping container (I don't remember the dimensions).

    4. Re:Must fit in cargo container. by killthiskid · · Score: 2

      Cool, seen those on TV, didn't know what it was.

      What sort of power house?
      How steep on incline can it climb?
      Fording depth?
      Top speed?

    5. Re:Must fit in cargo container. by pa-guy · · Score: 1
      GM 6v53 six cylinder diesel.
      Max grade is 60%
      Swims instead of fording
      Top speed was supposed to be about 40mph, but most would go closer to 50mph. More info here:http://afvdb.50megs.com/usa/acrc.html#Lynx

      Hey it would fit in the container, but unless you took those damned rubber track skirts off it would be really tight

    6. Re:Must fit in cargo container. by Infinite+Monkeys · · Score: 1

      Sure, this is a possibility, but Italian tanks only have a reverse gear.

    7. Re:Must fit in cargo container. by killthiskid · · Score: 2

      I checked on the apc... it would fit too... by about 1.5 inches. I guess they probably had that in mind, but I'm wondering what the weight limit is on a cargo container.

      Oh yeah, I was going to mention that the M113A3 has hydrostatic steering as opposed to pull-stick steering. It's actually very maneuverable, and can spin on a dime (opposing track motion). Top speed supposed to be 42 or so (governed out), but on a downhill grad it'll go faster ;) It will also do a 60% grade, and has a turbo V8.

      So I'm wondering exactly what the difference between the two are??? More weapon mounts? How many people does it hold?

      So what do mean when you say it 'swims'??? For the apc, it will swim, in that it'll float and go forward at a slow speed (3 mph or so).

    8. Re:Must fit in cargo container. by Aztech · · Score: 2

      The Brits had them too... they layed mines and high explosives directly below ships and made a quick get away, they blew up a load of Japanese ships in Singapore habour during WW2.

    9. Re:Must fit in cargo container. by pa-guy · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the M113A3 is a huge improvement over the A1's and 2's. Those had the same engine as the lynx and were dogs. The hydrostatic steering also makes a big diff. Biggest diffs are that the lynx only has a crew of 3 (driver, commander, and observer/rad op), .50 cal in a cupola (can be fired electrically from inside when buttoned up), 7.62 mg on a pintle mount for the observer (useless), engine in the rear (meaning that the observer , who faced backwards, basically turned black in an hour or so), mounting brackets for the AN/PPS 15 ground surveillance radar. The lynx was a very close cousin to the M-114, and they both filled the same role: light recon. Light recce is now done in Canada with the coyote, a LAV based vehicle with a 25mm chain gun, radar thats actually usable, thermal imaging on all crew stations. Beautiful piece of kit.
      http://www.ironsides.8m.com/afv/recce/eyes.html

  15. nothing is foolproof - for fools are ingenious by augros · · Score: 3, Funny

    maybe i'll submit my stone vehicle with no moving parts. it's virtually indestructable!

    1. Re:nothing is foolproof - for fools are ingenious by lww · · Score: 1

      Umm, shouldn't that be igneous? :)

    2. Re:nothing is foolproof - for fools are ingenious by VoiceOfRaisin · · Score: 1

      its no match for my paper vehicle.

      paper beats rock right?

  16. Two questions ... by Ldir · · Score: 5, Funny
    1. Are there any restrictions on weaponry? The FAQ doesn't mention this.

    2. Will an M1 Abrams fit in an 8'x8'x20' container?

    Can't wait, should be a wild show.

    1. Re:Two questions ... by Tackhead · · Score: 5, Funny
      > 1. Are there any restrictions on weaponry? The FAQ doesn't mention this.

      If the answer here is "No"...

      > 2. Will an M1 Abrams fit in an 8'x8'x20' container?

      ...then the answer here is "Yes - but only after my robot's finished with it" ;-)

    2. Re:Two questions ... by Boltmeyer · · Score: 1

      According to this, the M1 won't fit in a shipping container in any direction. Damn.

      According to this link, however, it will fit the height requirement, but you'd still have to smash the hell out of it.
      www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m1.htm Here are the stats from another site:

      M1 Abrams Main Battle Tank

      UNCLASSIFIED

      Crew 4
      Length overall 9.766m
      Width 3.653m
      Height 2.885m
      Ground Clearance 0.432m
      Max speed on road 72.5km/hr
      Range 500km
      Engine power 1,500hp
      Main gun 120mm
      Weapon Range 1,846m

      Not to mention the fact that the three teammates would be really busy doing the work of four soldiers. So NO, the M1 won't fit into a shipping container.

    3. Re:Two questions ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A equally effective weapon that will fit in the space would be a .50 caliber rifle. Barrett sells one that is a semi-automatic with a 10 clip magazine and supposibly only has the kick back of a 12 gauge shot gun. I am sure you could modify it to fit it the space, and I can assure you it will destroy the competition :)

      check out http://www.barrettrifles.com

    4. Re:Two questions ... by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Excuse me but here on slashdot we prefer to use open source weaponry. The M1 isn't even Linux driven for god's sake!

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    5. Re:Two questions ... by mumkin · · Score: 1
      2. Will an M1 Abrams fit in an 8'x8'x20' container?


      You'd have to break it down a bit. According to the Pakistani Defense Journal, an assembled M1A is about 32' x 12' x 8'.

      I suspect that you'd be spending a lot of your own money on that -- the Ultimate Machine Combat budget will probably be just enough to cover an old Nova, some rusty steel plate and an extension ladder.

  17. Including... by wiredog · · Score: 3, Funny

    Sink like a rock. If some damn fool forgets to put the drain plugs back in before the river crossing.

    1. Re:Including... by killthiskid · · Score: 2

      I actually know someone who did that.

      Luckily, no one died. But let just say he didn't drive a 113 anymore.

      It was cool to see the tank recovery vehicle pull it to shore, though. Now those things are huge.

    2. Re:Including... by pa-guy · · Score: 1
      So do I. You weren't in the Strathcona's or VIII CH were you?

      It was cool to see the tank recovery vehicle pull it to shore, though. Now those things are huge.

      ARV driver is one of the best jobs in a tank squadron. You hang out with the mech's instead of the muscleheads, staying back until needed. The downside is that you spend alot of time playing fetch and carry for the mechs and staying up all night to help get a POS leo running again only to have it break down again the next week.

    3. Re:Including... by killthiskid · · Score: 2

      Wow, you are over my head. I'm -was- a 12B (combat engineer) from South Dakota. National Gaurd, I know, I know, don't hate me.

      Gaurds was excellent. Got to see (and tie the electic det. lines) on a 250 pnd C4 explosion, drive the apc, shot the .50 cal, Mark 19, granades... etc.

      I did things I would never do other wise. And I got paid quite well for it. The one thing I hated? Peeing in a cup. Drug test suck in that it is the most demeaning thing in my life.

      So, to answer your question, no I wasn't there. Kinda wish I was. Where & what did you do???

  18. Desecration of the whole idea! by FortKnox · · Score: 2

    I don't like this having the 'junkyard wars' name attached to it. It should have the 'battlebots' name attached. The joy of junkyard wars is that each week is a different scenario, with a different goal!

    You are already introducing the goal to everyone way ahead of time. Now you're just going to get the basic 'battlebot' type constructs (ie: ramp, buzzsaw, etc...).

    Way to take something creative and make it something repetitive...

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    1. Re:Desecration of the whole idea! by Fishstick · · Score: 1

      > I don't like this having the 'junkyard wars' name attached to it

      Aside from the /. headline, the only "attachment" appears to be that it is the same producers. The name is 'Ultimate Machine Combat' and it doesn't seem to borrow/lean on the junkyard concept much at all, at least from the info on the website.

      Your team builds offsite, no apparent requirement to use scrap at all. I agree that this is closer to a battlebot concept. I've always though CC focused too much on the 'sports arena' aspect of the competition. I've wanted to see a little more on how the bots are designed and built, less on Bill Dwyer's witty comments and the Taco Bell instant replays of the action.

      I think this show might give me what I'm interested in. Show me the teams designing their machines, building them, interacting to overcome unexpected problems and *then* go to the competition.

      Course, there is a big difference too in that these appear to be manned vehicles that will be engaging in some kind of all-terain test, rather than remote-controlled machines that are pitted against each other.

      --

      There is much cruelty in the universe, John.
      Yeah, we seem to have the tour map.

    2. Re:Desecration of the whole idea! by goldspider · · Score: 1
      "Now you're just going to get the basic 'battlebot' type constructs (ie: ramp, buzzsaw, etc...)."

      I can't decide if the idea of a 3-ton monstrosity spinning at 8000 RPM is more frightening or comical.

      Trust me, the larger scale of the 'bots will have an enormous impact on their design and capabilities.

      --
      "Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
  19. What I want to know by anti-snot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Are they still doing the silly thing with an audience? Shows of this nature *should* be filmed in the wilderness with the (few) required cameramen in bunkers and the human combatants safely sealed away... then they can get rid of those silly safety rules. Like explosives, adhesives, electrics, liquids...

    1. Re:What I want to know by McSpew · · Score: 2

      What audience?

      Perhaps you're thinking of BattleBots, Robotica, or Robot Wars. All of those have studio audiences. Junkyard Wars and Scrapheap Challenge have never had audiences, except for one of the dragster races. That was the grand championship of the season, and numerous competitors from that season and previous ones were in the stands at the dragstrip during the races.

  20. gundam? by minus_273 · · Score: 1

    i mean seriously,
    look at how far we have come.. it is a ebventualty that we will have mobile suits, that is probably one of the best disigns too.. the advancements being made in the field of bipedal motion and robotics and processor power of a chip will all contribute to this... the fact that people are willing to spend good money to do this is also very good.
    More money for science... is always good

    --
    The war with islam is a war on the beast
    The war on terror is a war for peace
    1. Re:gundam? by Aexia · · Score: 1

      Maybe if it ends up something like G Gundam, and leadership of the free world was decided by the outcome of the fight.

    2. Re:gundam? by Ashyukun · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, I don't think that many Mobile Suits would fit into a 8x8x20 shipping container or be re-assembled in 4 hours if they were taken apart (this, of course, ignoring the fact that nobody has actually managed to build one yet...) Though it -would- be amusing to see someone show up with some form of powered armor... though that might cause problems with the whole roll-cage requirement...

    3. Re:gundam? by minus_273 · · Score: 1

      hey, my gundams fit in atny box and can be assembled in a few hours...of course.. depending on your skill...
      beyond that though, a mobile suit is very possible since they say that there will be drivers, can you imagine the mobility and agility of such a thing, look at how easily and quicly it can turn.. compare that to a LAnd rover...

      --
      The war with islam is a war on the beast
      The war on terror is a war for peace
    4. Re:gundam? by Lectrik · · Score: 1

      Does anyone remember the old movie Robot Jocks (i'm pretty sure it's been years since i've seen it) they had giant robots, high power weapons and an audience, though the audience was situated back from the feild and under a reflective screen incase of stay laser fire.

      --
      --- As to make my comment seem, by comparison, more intelegent... doodie doodie doodie poop poop poop!
  21. High Power Weaponry by don_carnage · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Why is it when anyone mentions robots fighting, they always think of sawblades and pneumatic spikes? I want to see .50 caliber machine guns, napalm and mines. I mean come on a metal ball on a spike spinning at 3000rpm? How about a 1/2" slug of steel traveling at 1500fps?

    Yar!

    1. Re:High Power Weaponry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You wouldn't really be able to have people attend the event and watch close up, now would you?

    2. Re:High Power Weaponry by geekoid · · Score: 2

      1500fps! thats some killer framerate dude!

      1/2 inch slug travelling at 1500fps is easy to stop, if you prepare for it, which they would if it was allowed.
      how about a pony nuke?

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    3. Re:High Power Weaponry by Darth+RadaR · · Score: 2

      I want to see .50 caliber machine guns, napalm and mines. I mean come on a metal ball on a spike spinning at 3000rpm? How about a 1/2" slug of steel traveling at 1500fps?

      Fun? Yes. But would you want to volunteer for that camera-man job? Even if you had remote controlled cameras, chances are they get blown to pieces Real Quick. :)

      --
      /*drunk.. fix later*/
    4. Re:High Power Weaponry by edremy · · Score: 2
      Nah, this is a solved problem. People take pictures of explosions all the time at very short ranges.

      Step 1: Built a *^##% thick wall

      Step 2: Place camera behind wall. Attach remote pan+zoom

      Step 3: Put a mirror so that the camera can see around the wall

      --
      "Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
    5. Re:High Power Weaponry by Darth+RadaR · · Score: 2

      Step 3: Put a mirror so that the camera can see around the wall

      ITYM mirrors. Y'know that some of them are going to get tagged.

      --
      /*drunk.. fix later*/
    6. Re:High Power Weaponry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Put a high powered camera in a plane/blimp circling overhead. If a spy sat can get good shots from 200 miles overhead they should be able to safely do it from a plane at 5000ft.

  22. Local jeep club by Chundra · · Score: 4, Funny

    It seems like if you stick the average soccer mom behind the wheel of a jeep grand cherokee, give her some eye makeup, a cell phone, and a few boxes of mcnuggets she would destroy the competition.

    1. Re:Local jeep club by debiansierra · · Score: 1, Insightful

      this is funny? +3 funny? you lost me there, while humorous, did it deserve a modding of any caliber? oh, yeah, this must be flamebait, mod away. (Amazing cynicism from someone who has yet to be modded down but is still disgusted at the apparent idiocy of MOST mods)

      --
      I would like some milk from the milkman's wife's tits
    2. Re:Local jeep club by Monkelectric · · Score: 1

      What i find amusing is his jeep site *isn't slashdoted*.

      (no one cares)

      --

      Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley

    3. Re:Local jeep club by dimator · · Score: 2

      This is slashdot man. Any predictable attempt at humor gets maximum mods. It's rare that a +Funny is actually funny.

      --
      python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
    4. Re:Local jeep club by debiansierra · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      haha I KNOW i got modded down for not ever being modded down. stupid bitches, mod this one down too you stupid fucks. as much as i add interesting commentary and have never trolled and the 1 time i call a moderation into question i get modded as a troll, haha laughable (that's okay, one day i'll have mod points too, that is the point isn't it to use you mod points to exact revenge?)

      --
      I would like some milk from the milkman's wife's tits
    5. Re:Local jeep club by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope, you'll never get mod status because your UID (>500,000) is too high.

    6. Re:Local jeep club by Spyder · · Score: 1

      It seems like if you stick the average soccer mom behind the wheel of a jeep grand cherokee, give her some eye makeup, a cell phone, and a few boxes of mcnuggets she would destroy the competition.

      And not even notice.

      --
      Spyder
    7. Re:Local jeep club by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      j00 = teh asshat

    8. Re:Local jeep club by AugstWest · · Score: 2

      Here's the deal:

      Humor is subjective.

      Sing it with me kids,

      What might be right for you.... May not be right for some....

      but it takes...

      diff'rent strokes, it takes.... diff'rent strokes....

      There's nothing more amusing than someone telling another person that what they're laughing at isn't funny.

    9. Re:Local jeep club by ahde · · Score: 2

      yeah, but this *was* friggin funny

  23. Very cool! by ookla_the_mok · · Score: 0

    This reminded me a similar challenge (without the combat and mayhem of course:) The GRM $2002 motorsports challenge

    Rules are you buy, build and race a car for under $2002.00. The Challenge consists of a drag race, autocross and a concours competition.

  24. Better yet by wiredog · · Score: 2

    20 mm depleted uranium slugs at a rate of 5000 rounds/minute.

    1. Re:Better yet by don_carnage · · Score: 2

      Mmmmmm....A10 Warthog -- capable of destroying a tank in 1.7 seconds.

    2. Re:Better yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, who would be the entrants, Bill Gates and the militaries of a few Western nations?

  25. what up w/ threads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ehhh, the unlimited budget is bogus.

    "What kind of machine is yours?"
    "A tank"
    "Really, how did you build it?"
    "I didn't, bought it from the army and added some extra 'stuff'. Btw, used your money to buy a month of beer while I waited for you to fly me out"
    "We need to change our rules"
    D~y

  26. For the sake of Patriotism by fobbman · · Score: 4, Funny

    For the sake of Patriotism I say that Colin Powell should enter. The rules did state that they will allow you to spend MORE than the money that they give you, and nothing would be greater than to see the looks on the MIT entrants faces when the Area 51 entry enters the arena.

    1. Re:For the sake of Patriotism by Com2Kid · · Score: 2

      Hehe. I can just imagine the shipping container /floating/ down onto the battle field. :) Yah that would rock, hehe. Best part would be if it could change its own size and stuff so that when it came out of the shipping container it expanded to a few hundred feet in diameter and proceeded to blow the entire arena up and create a crater a few miles in diameter. :)

    2. Re:For the sake of Patriotism by Winged+Cat · · Score: 1

      ...and the looks on the Area 51 techs when MIT, with a bit more practical experience, wins. ;)

  27. Five 9 availability... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...only applies to the Datacenter Edition. To get any kind of guarantee from MS, the installer is VERY restricted to which apps go on the box.

    You are not even allowed to install the OS yourself. Only approved installers set up you box for you.

  28. Why does it always have to be robot combat? by damiangerous · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Let's face it, the worst thing about those robot shows is the combat. It's never particularly destructive, and it's not very exciting to watch. The announcers scream like it's a gladatorial fight to the death, but in reality there's a little chipped paint and maybe some smoke from a burned out motor. Oh, and sometimes things fall off. The safety rules prevent anything really cool from happening. This is why the best of the robot shows is Robotica, they seem to understand that obstacles and problem solving are the true tests of engineering prowess, though that duel at the end is the worst part of the show. With this new show the combat will probably be even worse. It seems to involve human piloting, so the safety regs will be pretty strict. No more fun there. Seems like it'll be little more than demolition derby with custom cars. And what's with the unlimited budget? Everyone should be limited to the cash they give you and no more. Building it at home is pretty boring too. The design and build process, especially under a tight deadline with ad hoc equipment, is the most interesting part. Of course, since you're allowed effectively unlimited time and money, you can just buy a victory once the ideal design has been established. It's not like there's a dearth or research on fighting vehicles.

    The problem solving with limited time and equipment of Junkyard Wars is what makes it one of the best shows out there. Sure, I suppose you could say Battlebots is "problem solving," but it's hardly a new and unique problem with new approaches. And you can build your bot at home with just about anything you want. At this point the effectiveness of the various robot designs have pretty much been settled and it's down to the small differences. Did you know there's even at least one book on breaking into the robot competition business? Yeah, business. It's becoming about as exciting as NASCAR. What it comes down to is Battlebots is about form, Junkyard Wars is about function. To put it in Slashdot terms, Battlebots is for MCSEs and Junkyard Wars is for Linux geeks.

    1. Re:Why does it always have to be robot combat? by Com2Kid · · Score: 1

      "Let's face it, the worst thing about those robot shows is the combat. It's never particularly destructive, and it's not very exciting to watch. "

      May I suggest you change shows?

      Battle Bots this year rocks. Last night a spinner chewed through some dudes half inch titanium armor.

      200lb robots flying through the air, kick ass.

    2. Re:Why does it always have to be robot combat? by codepunk · · Score: 1

      So it takes little engineering skills to build a battle bot? Yea right I bet you would have less than a 2% chance of building anyting that was remotely competitive.

      --


      Got Code?
    3. Re:Why does it always have to be robot combat? by Rocky · · Score: 1

      Yeah, then he flipped over like a dead goat.

      What an anticlimax...

      --
      "I'm an old-fashioned type of guy. I worship the Sun and Moon as gods. And fear them."
    4. Re:Why does it always have to be robot combat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, sometimes there's some cool stuff on there. For example, one time this spinner roboto went up against this robot with a saw blade oriented vertically between two wheels, and when the two collided the saw blade robot practically exploded, sending it's wheels flying and oil spewed everywhere.

      Sure, there are a lot of boring battles too... I think they really need to get better hazards in that arena... only the saw blades are in any way destructive. They need a crusher that will really crush the robot if it falls in! Not a stupid hammer that whacks it and does no visible damage at all, or stupid screws that only ever manage to catch the edge of short robots under them so that they get stuck and can't move. Booring! But the saws are cool. But they could be cooler. They ned dual saws proented horizontally that spin in opposite directions so as to capture a robot pushed in there and start sawing it in half.

      But I think they don't want to do this because it would ruin the robots and make the sport too expensive.

    5. Re:Why does it always have to be robot combat? by Bert64 · · Score: 1

      But the destructive robots in these shows, are often in the minority, and often lose out to the wedge robot that just tips it on its side and leaves it, or pushes it down a hole, or gets it stuck on some arena-side spikes.

      Instead, the arena should be plain, no spikes, no pits, no saws, no flamepits. And it should be a free for all, with 4 or more robots fighting, with NO POINTS for turning a robot over, to WIN you must be the last robot which is still active. If you are turned over, but your wheels can still turn, your still operable and fair game.
      The fights should be in rounds, with no repairs, only refuelling allowed in between.
      If it looks like being a stalemate, then extra (house robots?) should be added to the fight, to liven it up a bit.

      This would encourage more destructive robots which are more resillient to attack, not some pile of scrap where the whole robot dies because a loose power cable comes unplugged. And you would see heavily damaged robots still running. On MANY shows i have seen robots which are still mobile after taking some serious hits, and it would be far more interesting to see just how much damage it takes to bring it down.

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
  29. Junkyward wars will never be popular by sinserve · · Score: 1

    Until FOX takes over it: Then it will change to a
    reality-TV/dating/contraversial/engineering beast.

    If I know the FOX producers well, this will be their format:

    A group of hunky and petite boys and girls will be
    sent to the wilderness, equiped with an entire
    garage of tools, and bathing suits.

    The group ("tribe" from now onwards) will contain
    people of conflicting personalities and culture:
    There will be Kevin the KKK wannabe, Debbie the dyke,
    a token black man, and a dozen or so undecided suburban
    kids who just walk around semi naked .. in winter!

    1. Re:Junkyward wars will never be popular by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or it'll be a pair of drunk, fat, couch potatoes staggering around in their boxer shorts fighting it out as in 90% of arrest scenes in Fox's COPS.

  30. For those who didn't bother to read the page by RebornData · · Score: 4, Informative

    For better or for worse, this doesn't sound like a battlebots-style "destroy the competition" demolition derby. Rather, it's a massive obstacle course (details to be disclosed), although the vehicle is supposed to be able to survive small collisions. The idea is not to build a massively destructive machine, but rather one that is as versatile as possible with respect to handling terrain, towing things, etc...

  31. Rubber-tired backhoe? by eli173 · · Score: 1

    I think the versatility of a rubber-tired backhoe would provide an _excellent_ starting point for this competition...
    The hydrolics can get you out of some deep holes.
    I can see it now:
    "To win, you have to get across this stream."
    Ok, boys, dam it. Or divert it around us.
    *grin*

    1. Re:Rubber-tired backhoe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually.... I was thinking more along the lines of a logging "Skidder". 4 wheel drive, articulating steering, most already have a roll bar installed, a fairly indestructable machine already.

      A skidder is used to drag logs out of an area that is being logged. They are probably most used in small to small-medium logging operations.

  32. The name 'Ultimate Machine Combat'... by devross · · Score: 1

    Sort of brought to mind something a little more destructive. Maybe the show should be called 'Ultimate Machine Obsticle Course and Demolition Derby'.

    --


    If these walls could talk they'd probly still ignore me. --MF DOOM
  33. Well I hope they get one thing straight: by Uttles · · Score: 2

    We want to see hot hosts. Junkyard wars had some obnoxious hosts, and neither were hot, one was even male. Battlebots is fun to watch at times, and then greatly annoying while the male announcers are jawing off. My reccomendation: have two Carmen-Electraesque hosts dressed in thong bikinis and let them ask simple questions like "how's it going" to the builders. That way, we'll hear from people we want to hear from, and we'll see what we want to see.

    --

    ~ now you know
    1. Re:Well I hope they get one thing straight: by edremy · · Score: 3, Funny

      If you honestly think that a silicone-inflated Carmen Electra-like bubblehead is sexier than Cathy Rogers, I feel sorry for you.

      --
      "Seven Deadly Sins? I thought it was a to-do list!"
    2. Re:Well I hope they get one thing straight: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you nuts? junkyard wars had at least one damn *fine* host. i only wish i knew her name.

    3. Re:Well I hope they get one thing straight: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would marry cathy rogers in a second.

    4. Re:Well I hope they get one thing straight: by Luminous · · Score: 2

      Give me Cathy Rogers ANYDAY OF THE WEEK! Intelligent women are a turn on!

      --
      This is not the way to build a lasting empire.
    5. Re:Well I hope they get one thing straight: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      > We want to see hot hosts.

      I read that as "bot hosts" first, and that'd be great! At least for the battlebots-type shows, maybe not this one. Bot hosts for bot shows.

      They could have two of them: Number 5, and of course some "female" robot. All I can think of is the one from Metropolis.

      Or maybe ED-209 from Robocop? Hmm...

      /August.

    6. Re:Well I hope they get one thing straight: by schon · · Score: 1

      junkyard wars had at least one damn *fine* host. i only wish i knew her name

      That would be Cathy Rogers.

      Talk about sexy.. she has a PhD, and plays keyboards in a Rock band (Marine Research)..

      Hmm.. she sounds like a female version of Buckaroo Banzai!

  34. Like this, no battle...Engineers Challenge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I always thought a Engineers Challenge would be a good show. Just like Junkyard Wars, but instead of using scrap parts they could actually design and use new parts.

    Give them a month (or something like that) to prepare for a challege and they can build whatever they want, however they want to. The final design is then tested just like they do in Junkyard Wars.

    Who knows what ideas someone might come up with that might revolutionize some industry.

  35. would be interesting anyhow... by sterno · · Score: 2

    Actually I'd be fascinated to see how an over-engineered ultra-expensive bot would fair against somebody sticking to the budget. Having watched much Battlebots, it's always hilarious to see some bot with sponsors, get it's butt handed to it by some 12 year old who built their bot as a science project for school.

    They mention that the arena is "secret". I'm wondering if the contestants know what they are getting into before they show up. Will they be able to customize the vehicle to the environment or will they have to build something fairly adaptable to handle an unknown situation. It would suck to show up with racing slicks on some low slung fast vehicle to find out that you have to deal with a mud bog, etc.

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
    1. Re:would be interesting anyhow... by DevNull+Ogre · · Score: 1

      Right on. I think it would be great fun to see what a well-financed team can do.

      It looks like they'll need to build something adaptable. Part of the idea is that the machine will have to do just about everything well. But they will have more information about the course than we are given now.

      From the FAQ:

      Q: What is the course like?

      The competition is in fact a series of tests. The course is TOP SECRET but we can tell you that your vehicle has to be able to handle all terrains, climb any hill (at least 30 degrees), be manoeuvrable, tow a reasonable amount of weight and survive numerous low-speed collisions (in the words of our chief engineer, "it should be smash proof!"). It has to be the ultimate combat machine. Don't worry, we will give you more details about the challenges before you start building your machine.

    2. Re:would be interesting anyhow... by Pope · · Score: 1

      Actually, did you see last year's Robotica chapionships? It's the only time I've watched the show, but the ultimate winner was this crazily cheap, stupid looking little robot that ended up in the finals, and won be default because the other two robots went over the edge!

      I swear, the thing looked like it weighed about 20 lbs and cost under $100. Quite the upset for the folks who spend upwards up $2000 for their machines.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
  36. Now lets move to the next step. by Restil · · Score: 2

    The robots used in these games are little more than glorified RC cars. Next stage would be to get the bots completely computer controlled. Of course, that could be rather dangerous. The simple directive, "Kill anything that moves" could have hazardous consequences if the arena boundaries are somehow blurred.

    -Restil

    --
    Play with my webcams and lights here
  37. The best of Battle Bots and JYWs by swordboy · · Score: 2

    Junk Yard Bots!

    I'd like to see them turn loose the guys from Battle Bots into a junk yard full of Futaba equipped rubble...

    --

    Life is the leading cause of death in America.
  38. An observation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When was the last time you found an entire working car in a junkyard? How many times has that happened on junkyard wars? Wouldn't that be great if once..just once..they put together something with an engine only to find out the engine didnt work? How real is junkyard wars?

  39. Carbuerators... by sterno · · Score: 2

    What would be even more hilarious is to have them step into the arena thinking they are going to demolish the other team with their EMP. Then they find out about 5 seconds later that the competitor is all old school. Then Mr. Old School drives them into the ground thanks to all that money they wasted.

    Also, any effective EMP device would likely piss off TLC. You know how expensive those cameras are? :)

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
    1. Re:Carbuerators... by DeanT · · Score: 1
      Then Mr. Old School...
      Most "Old Schools" I know would still use electronic ignition vs. old-time points. More efficient and put out a nice fat spark to help make power.

      Just my thoughts.

      DeanT

  40. New Show by narcosis · · Score: 4, Funny

    The makers of Junkyard Wars are starting up a new series called Clock Speed Wars. 2 dorks each build an "ultimate computing device" to battle in a "secret porn downloading race". This is attracting fellow pocket-protector devotees of all genres, including my local Taped Glasses Club

  41. Might I suggest... by sterno · · Score: 1

    Signing up for Al Qaeda? I hear they've been seeing lots of projectiles, and high explosives lately :)

    --
    This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
  42. Survival Research Laboratories by vtweb · · Score: 5, Informative

    These people at http://www.srl.org/ have
    been building massive destructive machines
    since 1978, staging large outdoor events
    generally involving shows akin to "let's shake them in a jar, and see if they'll fight".
    Flames, jet engines, crushers, all the things this new program would want.

  43. ARRGGH!! NOOOO!!! Not ANOTHER one! by bani · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The LAST thing we need on TV is another faux-WWF show. Gah!!!

    Come on, we already have Battlebots, Robotica, etc...

    Do we REALLY need ANOTHER?

    We need more CONSTRUCTIVE shows like Junkyard Wars / Scrapheap Challenge.

    We don't need another idiot 'bang contestants machines against each other till the audience falls asleep from utter boredom'.

    I can see it now. A scantily clad cathy rogers draping herself over the contestants machines while robert llewelyn growls and grunts like an idiot white trash WWF announcer.

    1. Re:ARRGGH!! NOOOO!!! Not ANOTHER one! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I can see it now. A scantily clad cathy rogers draping herself over the contestants machines while robert llewelyn growls and grunts like an idiot white trash WWF announcer."

      We already have Carmen Electra's big juicy breasts. England got stuck with Lister from Red Dwarf.

  44. Re:Deadline past (February 15th - read the FAQ) by swordboy · · Score: 2

    Read the FAQ.

    Q: What's the deadline?

    February 15th, 2002 is the last possible date we will accept applications (but aim for earlier!)

    --

    Life is the leading cause of death in America.
  45. kind of dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    its like battle bots but with the high mortality rate. you know i will watching. or as don king would say "only in america"

  46. Re:Speaking of George W. Bush by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You know, you would be so much more effective if you made ANY FUCKING SENSE!

  47. I really think there is a market for this... by mrroot · · Score: 2

    I think the market for this is still largely un-tapped. I see corporate sponsorship of these teams in the future, like they do with Nascar.

    Actually, what they are doing sounds alot like Battle Bots, which I think probably has even greater potential. There's something cathartic about seeing a robot get smashed to bits by another robot.

    --
    I Heart Sorting Networks
  48. Weapons? Please!?!?! by Com2Kid · · Score: 2

    I would just get something with a rocket launcher on it and blow the other teams up. Way I see it you could drag your vehicle along after that and you would still win. All you need is here

  49. Building a robot by bliss · · Score: 1

    Curiously I would like to know how one actually goes about building a robot of any decent calibur? How is this accomplished in any reasonable way? I had trouble building a proper electromagnet in elementary school.

    --
    The death of one man is a tragedy; the death of a million is a statistic --Joseph Stalin
    1. Re:Building a robot by dbc001 · · Score: 1

      Good question! I'd love to know how to build a robot. Could someone also please describe how to go about building a decent car or airplane?

    2. Re:Building a robot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These are not robots. What gave you that idea? These teams will build vehicles that must compete on some undisclosed course. The trick is to anticipate the conditions you may face and build something able to handle it. I've seen no indication that these vehicles are going to 'battle' each other in any way.

      Did you even *watch* junkyard Mega-wars? This is the same premise, only instead of 10 hours they have 30 days to build. Instead of scrounging parts from a scrapheap, they can use whatever they can buy with the project budget they are given. Instead of 2 or 3 theams, there are 30.

    3. Re:Building a robot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Instead of knowing in advance that they will have to race over salt-flat, rocky terrain and then amphib, they have to guess.

    4. Re:Building a robot by Lumpy · · Score: 2

      A real robot is quite challenging... but can be done easily in someones garage... what you see on tv is not a robot by any stretch of the imagination. battlebots and robotica have no robots in them all they have are remote control cars with weapons.

      to call them robots is like calling a monitor the computer.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    5. Re:Building a robot by Grab · · Score: 2

      Same way as any other engineering project. You work out what you want it to do, then you find out what you can actually afford, then you hook all the bits together.

      The hooking together is the fun bit - welding, screwdrivers, etc - but you need some theory to start with to work out whether your robot will be competitive with the motors and weaponry you give it. It's that first stage of deciding what to do which is all-important - if you don't get that right then you'll have to modify your gear once it's all built, which is usually very difficult or impossible. And that's the difference between a good engineer and someone who just whacks something together randomly out of junk. The _real_ talent though is to look at a pile of junk and work out how you can use it constructively to meet your requirements!

      Grab.

  50. a good free usenet server with binaries? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    just wondering

  51. read this offtopic post! by kilgore_47 · · Score: 0, Offtopic



    For God's sake, do not kill us! We surrender!

    quoting from rw: Before dawn in Afghanistan last Thursday, US Green Berets launched a surprise attack on their unarmed allies, storming a disarmament depot with indiscriminate fire, then rounding up survivors only to tie their hands behind their backs with plastic bands and execute them. This according to that America-hating, propaganda-strewn leftist rag, The New York Times. God bless America.

    (yes, I'm very much abusing my 50 karma account and spamming this message all over the place with a +1 bonus. People need to read it, ok? Read the fucking nytimes link. Thanks for your time.)

    --
    ___
    The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason. --Ben Franklin
  52. Re:read this offtopic post by bryan1945 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Yeah, I'm sure that they were unarmed and allies.

    Right.

    This has to be the first war were our news media gets their news from the enemies, and then reports it as fact.

    And also, the American hating NY Times is spewing hatred by blasting the military with bullshit claims, which is pretty consistent since the leftists hate the military.

    I read the story, but don't believe a word of it, mainly becuase I know the military, and they just don't do this kinda thing.

    --
    Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  53. how the devil do you do that? by bliss · · Score: 1

    "..then the answer here is "Yes - but only after my robot's finished with it" ;-)"

    how could anyone have the ability to do anything like that? any concrete examples or explanations?

    --
    The death of one man is a tragedy; the death of a million is a statistic --Joseph Stalin
    1. Re:how the devil do you do that? by Winged+Cat · · Score: 1

      Shred, compact, melt...the M1 wouldn't be *useable*, but its component materials (or, at least, whatever hadn't burned into gases) would fit in the container. Think a single large ingot of (mostly) metal.

    2. Re:how the devil do you do that? by Bloodrage · · Score: 1

      Mmmm, concrete, would be the best 'filler'.

      Standard cheap stock-car trick in these parts. Fill all vehicle cavities with concrete. Leave space for moving parts and driver. Need big engine.

      --
      i am endorsed for the carrying of dangerous goods, please be giving me your depleted uranium
  54. Would you settle for Paul Reiser? by brer_rabbit · · Score: 2

    If it can be done with german shephards, a mauling with bots shouldn't be too much of a stretch.

  55. or is that not possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    is it?

  56. Real Robot Fighting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The thing I hate about battlebots, robotica and other shows of that ilk is...well there are no robots, just some fancy remote control toys with stupid bronze-age weapons hacking at each other.

    Now, if the robots were completely autonomous that would be something I'd love to watch and maybe even participate in.

    Imagine a confused robot plunging madly into a crowd of spectators! Oh Yeah!

    1. Re:Real Robot Fighting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yea it is to easy to build a battle bot right? I got news for you buddy it ain't no picnic. Almost everything we use in our bots are custom built including the electronics. So either just talk the talk or get busy and prove me wrong.

  57. Demand equal time for software! by Larne · · Score: 1
    Where's the prime-time, over hyped premier of Core wars? For my money nothing beats the visceral thrill of watching one program write a 0 into another's actve memory!

    I'm telling you, this could be bigger than Junkyard wars, smackdown, and "Triumph of the Nerds" combined.

  58. The A-Team by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would clean up in this one.

    ...build the ultimate fighting vehicle. You will build it in your own backyard...

    Since this is the biggest, baddest motor-contest ever, we are looking for teams with exceptional skills, a passion for all things mechanical and a competitive streak that borders on the insane. The team must be able to fix, repair or jury-rig the vehicle in any way possible to get it working...

  59. certain destruction! by jjeffries · · Score: 2

    If you could only find the parts to build an EMP gun it would be easy to win. I'm afraid it wouldn't make for good TV, though.

  60. Thunderdome-style combat? Doesn't look like it by sudasana · · Score: 1

    From reading the FAQ, it doesn't look like the vehicles will be fighting against each-other, looks more like they'll be racing to complete various challenges (obstacle course, etc.) No mecha-style battles here I'm afraid. More like robotica with people in the giant machines, but without the final fight.

    --
    --- Foam weapons, real sparring: buyjin.com/diamondsword
  61. Ahem, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're an idiot.

  62. Robots fighting Robots - no more crap by CKW · · Score: 5, Insightful


    I'm sick of seeing two small wedges on wheels roll around like they were being driven by drunk mice, with matches only lasting 60 seconds, usually ended by some kind of mysterious mechanical failure. I'm sick of seeing "house robots" and "obstacle courses".

    I want to see two robots fight one another, nothing else.

    I want to see a plain empty gravel pit, with no crowds. I want to see two robots go in, and only one come out. I want to see four class systems. Weight classes, cost classes, power classes, and armaments classes.

    Power Classes:
    - Batteries
    - Unlimited

    Armaments Classes:
    - Mechanical weapons only
    - liquid/flamable-fuel/sub-cm-projectile based weapons allowed*
    - Unlimited class, large caliber projectiles, explosives and shaped charges, and EMP weapons allowed.

    The weight and costs classes will have to be set depending on just how many people are willing to compete in them, and considering that now most people have to face the real possibility of having their bot totalled in-game.

    May the best team win.

    And this time, the losers really do go to the scrapheap!

    (*) go-go-gadget sand-blaster! :)

    1. Re:Robots fighting Robots - no more crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sick of endless wedge variations and token damage myself. Half the time one guy wins because the other guy is incapable of controlling his robot (don't these guys practice?). Even Carmen Electra's nipples can't save that show.

      The fans are just a liability, put the whole thing in a Black Rock NV-like environment with people controlling and viewing the events via remote cameras from bunkers. Virtually anything goes with classes based on weight, weapons, and estimated $ value. Power shouldn't come only from crappy little batteries. Seeing the Aberdeen Proving Grounds entry alone would make it a winner.

    2. Re:Robots fighting Robots - no more crap by Winged+Cat · · Score: 1

      It'd be an expensive proposition for the entrants. Serious weapons cost serious money. Possibly, this show is one step towards resolving that: pay the participants (up to a certain amount) and carefully choose from among the applicants (so you can contain costs to dollars_per_team * number_of_teams - remember, the TV producers have to put food on their tables, too). You'd probably want a minimum weight limit, and minimum damage capability (i.e., "robot must be able to smash at least a 1/2 meter by 1/2 meter hole in a 5 cm thick aluminum wall"), to ensure people don't try to enter excessively wimpy bots. Maybe even specifically add "robot must be able to run upside down and/or right itself if flipped over" - it's common sense anyway, but who would bother with a wedgebot when you know everyone's going to be able to shrug off flips?

    3. Re:Robots fighting Robots - no more crap by elemental23 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      At the risk of being modded down as redundant (and undoing the positive moderation I gave another post in this thread), you really want to check out Survival Research Laboratories. "Producing the Most Dangerous Shows on Earth", as they say.

      You can occasionally catch their performances in the San Francisco area, or just look for pictures and video on their web site.

      --
      I like my women like my coffee... pale and bitter.
    4. Re:Robots fighting Robots - no more crap by grammar+fascist · · Score: 1

      I want to see two robots go in, and only one come out.

      That's all you want to see? How boring.

      --
      I got my Linux laptop at System76.
    5. Re:Robots fighting Robots - no more crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TheSteve here... posting as AC.. ah well

      what do you think of an FPS-like interface for the robot controllers? Operators sitting behind monitors with head-up displays superimposed over live video and audio from the robot itself..

      not trying to see what's going on while staring at a distant arean.. clumsily trying to make the robot do what you want with the remote control.. you don't need that..

      You could end up with a NASCAR-ish environment with Quake- and Descent-gods battling it out with fighting machines built and maintained by skilled teams with corporate sponsors.. hrmmm

      don't forget the underwater potential.. submarine simulations with actual subs down below.. something like the game Sub Command, but networked with people at their individual stations.. with the simulation staying in sync with high-dollar vehicles down below... flying combat machines would come shortly after.. hovering combat platforms to be sucked up by the military, no doubt... still could have fun with flying robots in a Descent-like arena with the control teams in VR units, though..

      anyways.. some thoughts..
      TheSteve

  63. Yay! by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 1

    This proves that if enough people say "Damnit, I want to see Junkyard wars plus battle bots plus iron chef!" we'll get at least some combination, eventually.
    Let's keep pushing for that iron chef addition though!

    --
    -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
  64. Competition for the rest of us. by ackthpt · · Score: 1

    Small budget? A lot of spring garage sales in your neighborhood? Then you need to read this from Dave Barry.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  65. NEOW SUCKS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NEOW is going to enter into this competition? ROFL. you guys cant even keep your club together, how the heck are you going to make anything? LOL, you'll submit one entry, and then break off into 10 factions and accomplish nothing.

    Fools.

  66. Can't wait for the UK vs. US competition! by sdo1 · · Score: 2

    Oh, that should be fun!

    Mini Cooper vs. Hummer

    -S

    --
    --- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
    1. Re:Can't wait for the UK vs. US competition! by Chicane-UK · · Score: 0

      But the great overpowered & overweight US entry doesnt always win.. besides, not all brits like Mini Coopers - I f'in hate em :)

      --
      "Hey! Unless this is a nude love-in, get the hell off my property!!"
  67. Crime Jamming by jamesmartinluther · · Score: 1

    This is an interesting episode of "crime jamming" and reminds me of strategies to reduce the population of unwanted insects. Criminals are exposed by dilluting their means to scam people with "neutered" sites.

    I could see this successfully applied to illegal online gambling, murder-for-hire, illegal forms of pornography, perhaps even to nab would-be terrorists.

    Unfortunately for the slashdot crowd, I could see the MPAA and other corporate orgs posting sites which catch people attempting to download software and content that they did not pay for. Hopefully, in this case, would-be bandits would only get Apple's favorite community service message: "Don't Steal Music".

    - James

    1. Re:Crime Jamming by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uuuuuuh, I think you replied to the wrong story.

  68. Um, "Bots" is a Bad Choice by virg_mattes · · Score: 2

    The specifications require that the design incorporate a roll cage. That strongly implies "vehicle", not "'bot". That also limits the destructive force you can bring to bear on the vehicle, as I doubt you're allowed to kill or injure the opposing entrant's occupant.

    Virg

    1. Re:Um, "Bots" is a Bad Choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "I doubt you're allowed to kill or injure the opposing entrant's occupant."

      But wouldn't it be more interesting if you WERE allowed to! ;)

  69. My hopes dashed... by Lumpy · · Score: 2

    Oh man I was hoping it was going to be the Steve Jackson game CAR WARS come true! But alas it's nothing like it. you know a Derby with projectile weapons... even if they are just grappling devices or blunt impact devices would just rock, espically if they can get a 4 block arena complete with burned out buildings and people on foot with Light antitank weapons.... oh wait. that might violate the rules .

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:My hopes dashed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You left out the guys with mohawks and Australian accents. "I AM THE NIGHT RIDER!!!!"

  70. It MIGHT be okay... by eexlebots · · Score: 1

    All I want to know is how close will this show come to having giant fighting mechs, a la the prophetic film "Robot Jox". If it's close then I WILL WATCH EVERY EPISODE. If, however, it's simply a competition to see how well these machines fare while racing along a crazy course, well...let's just say it could be better. MUCH better.

    --
    ***
  71. No! Kathy and the American hosts! by GregGardner · · Score: 2, Funny

    If it IS to the death I would love to see Kathy Rogers and the American hosts Tyler Whats-his-face and George Gray compete and lose a horrific, painful, and bloody battle. Then we can go back to the wonderful days of the first season where Robert Llewelyn was the one true host.

  72. Cherrios make great gifts by Graymalkin · · Score: 2

    While I'm up for a robot running a hazard course that has the potential to destroy said robot I'm not the biggest fan of the new fangled americanized JYW. While the Canadian is funny ("You're like totally runnin out of time eh!") the new method for forming teams sucks. I liked the old days of the entire team being engineers not just people who knew how to weld. Too many times it is the expert just giving instructions only to get confused looks on the faces of their teammates. It is also a pretty regular occurance that the team doesn't know what the fuck it is they're building. Maybe it is just me who likes to see engineers add features to their designs until it doesn't work following the old adage. Oh well, here's hoping one of these robots goes on a rampage and somebody has to call Ultraman to come fight it.

    --
    I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
  73. Re:Must fit in cargo container by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    by killthiskid on Wednesday January 30, @01:47PM

    My first thought was to use the body of an M113 APC, but the vehicle must fit in a 8 x 8 x 20 cargo container for shipment to England. The vehicle can be disassembled for transport, but it has to be able to be put back together in under four hours. Damn!

    Well, since the vehicle has to fit in a 20 foot container, you should have an absolute upper weight limit of about 25 tons. Quite a lot you can do with that. They'll probably lower it to 15 tons or less, still a respectable weight.

    We could actually see something based on military vehicles entered. The Scorpion family of vehicles fits the bill quite nicely, even if all you are allowed to use is the motive system. You should also see converted bulldozers and the like. Except for speed, tracks will probably have the advantage.

    It isn't totally unbelievable that defense contractors will enter or sponsor teams. If so, the sky is pretty much the limit. Will the final be Alvis versus General Dynamics or KMW versus United Defense?

    I will certainly be looking out for this!

    Death on tracks!

  74. A Reply by virg_mattes · · Score: 3, Informative

    Dude (dudette), the definition of "working" is really relative. I've spent plenty of time in junkyards in my youth, and I can tell you that many of the vehicles that go there aren't completely shot at all. In fact, many cars (that weren't stripped down for parts) that ended up there "worked" as well as any of the vehicles they find on JYW. They just have irrepairable body/frame damage (no worry when you're building a street sweeper but big problems for highway safety), expensive-to-fix mechanical problems (bodging up a transmission is easy if you don't need it to run more than 20 miles, and one of my co-workers got rid of his old car (perfectly workable) because of a big hole in the gas tank that cost too much to fix) or other problems (flood damage or major rust). So, in answer to your question, the last time I found a "complete working car" (by the standards of JYW) was the last time I was in a junkyard.

    Virg

  75. Different Venue by virg_mattes · · Score: 2

    This sort of competition already exists. They refer to the arena in which it takes place as (collectively) "the Middle East".

    Virg

  76. Too bad most APCs are just a little bit too big... by Kjella · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Most are around 2,5 x 6,5m, just over the 2,4 x 6m requirement... I'm sure someone will find a slightly smaller one.. add a batting ram, some additional wheel armoring to prevent wheels from getting jammed/punctured in the collisions.. Who needs a engineer, I think that team should have a medic instead - for the opponenets :)

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  77. Join the army by anonymous_wombat · · Score: 1

    If you want to battle, and blow things up, why waste your time with the amateur stuff? Also, you could do something useful. Maybe it's just me, but it seems like there was too much destruction in 2001 and not enough building. Creative engineers can find more useful ways of doing fun stuff.

  78. Just two words: by why-is-it · · Score: 1

    Rail Gun

    --
    *** Where are we going? And what's with this handbasket?
  79. What we need by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is an unlimited style of show... the only constraints are that it is:

    A) Unmanned
    B) Has a redundant and positive control kill/self destruct
    C) Has weapons with less than a 1 mile range
    D) Cannot fly above an altitude of 50 feet for more than 10 seconds
    E) Cannot exceed a ground or air speed of 100mph
    F) No EMP weapons (messes up cameras)
    G) Budget not to exceed 1 Million (all costs)
    H) Season total repair budget not to exceed 1 Million (all costs)
    I) Maximum weight fully loaded is 40 tons, minimum is 4 tons.
    J) Combatants may not use harmful exotic power sources such as nuclear.

    Everything and anything goes. Corporate sponsorship (especially from the automotive and military/industrial sectors). Set up a league, big money prizes (50K per match, 100K per semi, 1Mil to the winner and all the advertising that goes with it). Figure 30 teams. Pair them off each week, two bouts a week. The best of the first round (time and damage inflicted) gets a buy to the third round automatically. The last four, plus the best two runner's up get to a semi final showdown.

    The "Arena" is a flat plain with ridges on either end, tree's and rocky terrain in the center along with a river fed small lake (that does not exceed 10m depth). The total squareage is 5km, with a launch/base bunker on the ridges opposite each other. Time for battle is 20 minutes max, two matches per show. No ties, most damage wins. Robotic helo cameras, fixed semi-fixed cameras bring us the action, along with high tech computer satellite-like updates. Announcers are low keyed, the show centers on the action. We could even have a pilot cam that shows us the main operator of each combatant.

    1. Re:What we need by mlk · · Score: 1

      Sounds like the film Robojox.
      Dam that was a cool film.

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
  80. Bill Gates wins by javaaddikt · · Score: 1

    The thing that makes Junkyard wars so great is that each team has fixed resources. Success is based soley upon ingenuity (and sometimes just a shred of luck). It sounds like you can buy your way in this competition. Your uncle is Bill Gates? That's fine!

  81. Hopefully British by nedron · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Hopefully, this will be produced in England, as the American-based show was terribly lame. The male hosts were terrible and the American teams too, too, how do I say it --- too American! I'm an American and there is nothing worse than watching a bunch of bozos running around "whoop, whooping" and "raising the roof". Ugh! Additionally, it seemed as though many of the challenges were simply rehashes of British shows.

    I'm also not looking forward to this new series because I'm not into monster trucks or demolition derbies, which is the crowd this show seems to be targetting.

    --


    * As is generally the case, my opinions do not reflect those of my employer.
    1. Re:Hopefully British by mlk · · Score: 1

      Hopfully it'll be the presenters from Scrapheap Challenge.

      This really sounds like someone saw the Car Jouster, lets hope it's better thou, this was really just dancing about next to each other (you score points by "hitting" a section, not ripping it apeart!)

      mlk, looking forward to it.

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
    2. Re:Hopefully British by schon · · Score: 1

      The male hosts were terrible and the American teams too, too, how do I say it --- too American!

      I agree wholeheartedly.. in the British version, the goal for both teams seems to be "HAVE FUN" - you see some friendly banter, but the teams even co-operate (the mega-wars show epitomizes this - when the Russian team's vehicle couldn't finish the rock climb, the other teams offered to push!)

      Contrast this with the American shows, and you see teams almost attacking each other (I remember one captain telling his teammate to "run them over!" because the opposing team was trying to dislodge a piece of equipment.)

    3. Re:Hopefully British by nedron · · Score: 1

      I agree wholeheartedly.. in the British version, the goal for both teams seems to be "HAVE FUN"...

      Contrast this with the American shows, and you see teams almost attacking each other.


      I think you've really identified the issue with the American teams. They're often terribly mean spirited compared to the British teams. One of the worst examples was the American cannon challenge with "The Young Guns", one of the worst behaving teams ever fielded. Their comments to the older opposing team were at their best rude, at the worst inflamatory.
      --


      * As is generally the case, my opinions do not reflect those of my employer.
  82. Ah, the dream realized by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 2, Funny

    http://www.sjgames.com/car-wars/aada/

    When I was in high school, it was a boardgame. Now it's for real.

    ...rock on...

  83. terrorists by vinnythenose · · Score: 1

    That's right, the Terrorist Team has won again. The only team in the competition willing to break out the dirty nukes...

    --
    --- I used to moderate, then I read the -1 articles and decided having to filter through them was not worth it.
  84. Not EMP, HERF by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    HERF would be much better.. it's directional, cheap (you can build an effective one for under $100) small (easily fit on something motorcycle-sized) and easy (Antenna + amp + car battery.)

    The difference between a HERF and EMP is that damage from an EMP is permanent.. HERF just requires a reboot.

    Keep in mind that either one would be useless against a deisel engine.

  85. Re:read this offtopic post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Understand this, please:

    Everyone hates the US; we just don't have the quintessentially American desire to yammer about it just for the sake of yammering.

    Plus, it's very nice to have the chestthumping Americans do all the fighting; my country tags along and spends government money on things that matter like education. Does that make us weak? To your "bigger gun" mentality, sure. Meanwhile, our kids can read and write effectively and aren't shooting each other in school on a weekly basis.

    Frankly, the US can keep it's ego and bravado for all I care. Didn't you ever hang out with that big dumb kid who liked to fight in school just for the knowledge that nobody would jerk with you as long as he was around? The rest of the "alliance" countries do it to the blessed US each and every day and you guys lap it up because it looks like respect and support.

    So, enjoy that backpatting as another million dollar missile explodes and another round of "educated" students can't put together a coherent paragraph. That is, if they aren't mowed down in a hail of gunfire at grad.

  86. What show were YOU watching? by schon · · Score: 1

    While the Canadian is funny ... the new method for forming teams sucks. I liked the old days of the entire team being engineers not just people who knew how to weld.

    Sorry, which team is this?

    The FIRST season (which is as "old" as you can get) didn't even have "people who know how to weld" (I think there was only Bowser and Kali - one on each team..)

    Bowser was a cop, Kali was a car mechanic.. Dick was a soldier.. the closest thing to an engineer was Shen..

    Perhaps you were thinking of a different program?

    1. Re:What show were YOU watching? by Graymalkin · · Score: 2

      The Canadian host for fuck sake. I'm thinking along the lines of the second season or so. Maybe it was only a couple episodes or so but the episodes I did catch were all teams with a bit of mechanical experience behind them. Who the fuck pissed in your Cherrios anyway?

      --
      I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
    2. Re:What show were YOU watching? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sorry, but you're making even less sense than your previous post..

      You said essentially "While I like the Canadian host, I liked the old days of the entire team being engineers

      the "old days" would mean the first few seasons, no?

      Now you say that the canadian host IS in one of the early seasons (which not only contradicts your previous post, but is completely wrong - he presented the most recent season.)

  87. Mad Max by Belly · · Score: 1

    Someone should try and get Graham 'Grace' Walker on a team. He was the guy who designed and built most of the vehicles in the Mad Max movies...

  88. hummer fits in 8x8x20? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    if not, the mini wins handily hehe

  89. I saw it happen by wiredog · · Score: 2

    We were standing on a bridge, watching one of the companies doing a river crossing. The track got about halfway, stopped, then the hatches opened and everyone jumped overboard and swam to shore. This was in Korea in the 80's

  90. Does this mean.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...Cathy Rogers can afford some NEW CLOTHES now? Or some food so she can beef up a bit?
    All right PC prudes, mod me down!

  91. ROBOTS - Please don't call them ROBOTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know what the ( good looking but oh-so-thick ) presenters will call the machines that do battle in this program, but can someone PLEASE explain to them ( and the producers ) the difference between a remotely-controlled machine and a ROBOT.

  92. How long by cgleba · · Score: 3, Funny

    unitl the machines on these shows get so destructive that DARPA starts to fund them? :).

    1. Re:How long by Winged+Cat · · Score: 1

      DARPA doesn't have to fund it. Some of the grunts have been building their own 'bots. Though I would like to see an aerial combat contest, if only to have the infamous Predator as the house target^H^H^H^H^H^Hbot.

  93. Re:read this offtopic post by bryan1945 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Of course everyone hates the US. Everyone hated the British Empire, everyone hated the Roman empire.

    As for the uneducated, we still need people to pump gas and flip burgers, so oh well.

    A lot of people outside of the US also have misconceptions about the people in the US. The majority of Ameicans (well, at least the ones that complete college) don't like our media or our government very much, either. And the military is just the tool of the current government, so it is basically neutral. The military in the US can't say "No". The generals can resign, but that's about it. Yes, the US has done, is still doing, and most likely will do stupid stuff abroad.

    But for the somewhat educated who actually pay attention to what the government is doing rather than relying on TV sound bites, we don't like a lot of what is going on in general. There is a growing number of conservatives that are trying to roll back what the gov can do. We're trying to reverse the past 30-some years of leftist/socialist (probably means something else in your country, but here it basically means more/bigger government, more government control in your everyday life) policies so that the "if it feels good, do it" and "it's not my fault, I have a bruised pysche because I squirrel bit me once" attitudes get reversed to ideas of self-responsibility, self-support, and really trying to get along (rather than Al Sharpton's reverse racism talk).

    As I said above, the military is just a tool of the gov. The people I work with are good people who want to serve the country and do good things.

    Whew! Hope I clarified a bit in how a somewhat average American views eveything. Maybe you won't hate us as much, or be able to split your view between citizens and the gov.

    --
    Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  94. "rather than Al Sharpton's reverse racism talk" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I love that one...

    There is no reverse racism.
    Saying it that way IS racism...meaning only "normal" racism is toward "African People" (Blacks!).

    Sharpton is just segregating the white guys, and well, should have happened a long time ago anyway (sorry, but history...)

    On everything else, thank you for reminding us some of you aren't just Red Neck or Psychos...

    Now just remind you belong to a 5% split of the population, and the other 95% will try to grab you back/

    1. Re:"rather than Al Sharpton's reverse racism talk" by bryan1945 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Sorry, I used the term "reverse racism" because it is generally meant to be racism against caucasian folks, whereas plain "racism" is against non-caucasian folks. Stupid, I know, but I (dumbly, I admit) got used to those terms by hearing them enough.

      Hell, as long as even 1% is trying to make it better, I'll be optomistic (sp?).

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  95. Re:read this offtopic post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yep, war sucks. People die. Sometimes innocent people die, though after reading the article I'm not at all convinced that these folks were innocent. Anyway I'm not sure what your point is in posting this here- the only way you could really blame the US or even the soldiers involved is if you were desperately filled with hate and were looking for something, anything, to use as a weapon to attack them with. After reading the article I'm convinced only that 1) you've got a personal vendetta, 2) you've never BEEN in a war, and 3) the NYtimes sucks more than ever.