Quantum3D/NVIDIA technology: Military Applications
Posted by
Hemos
on from the battle-of-the-video dept.
rask22 writes "FiringSquad has a interesting new article up discussing the changes at Quantum3D since the demise of 3dfx along with the current military applications of NVidia chipsets. Interesting to see how the US Gov is using all this technology coming out of the gaming sector."
Military stuff gets back to the consumer
by
xee
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Sometime soon this military stuff will be availible for consumers wishing to build heavily ruggidized systems for their cars and ATVs. This is a very Good Thing, especially because it takes technology beyond what the main 90% need.
-- Oh shit! I forgot to click "Post Anonymously"...
I trust you read this today
by
Rareul
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Nvidia up after restatement, CFO splits
By Chris Kraeuter, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 4:15 PM ET April 29, 2002
SANTA CLARA, Calif. (CBS.MW) - Shares of Nvidia jumped 17 percent Monday after announcing an upward revision of earnings for the last three years and better than expected targets for the current quarter.
Also, the graphics chipmaker named Corporate Controller Mary Dotz as interim CFO as Christine Hoberg takes a "leave of absence." Nvidia said it will conduct a search for a permanent CFO.
Shares (NVDA: news, chart, profile) rose $5.06 to $35.43 on Monday.
For the quarter ended in April, Nvidia said it expects earnings of $79 million to $84 million, or 45 to 48 cents a share, on revenue of $570 million to $580 million. This outlook is ahead of Wall Street's consensus projections for a profit of 42 cents a share and revenue of $533.7 million.
As for the restatement, Nvidia will adjust results for the first three quarters of 2002 and fiscal 2001 and 2000 upward by a total of $1.3 million.
The restatement follows a review by the company's independent audit committee. The SEC had asked Nvidia to conduct a review.
-- General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
Re:Great...
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 1, Interesting
I wonder how much interest they've shown in newer games like Rogue Spear or CounterStrike. Though I wonder how much cheaper/more effective a good paintball game would be for this type of training.
Wanted: gamers
by
revbob
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
to visit exciting places, meet interesting people, and kill them.
so you mean that all this time i've been developing my hand/eye coordination i've been testing technologies that are now used in the military?
Yup.
Imagine yourself for a moment wearing a brass hat. You've got a stream of young civilians coming in to begin their military service. Your goal is to train those young people so that they:
Defeat the enemy,
Remain as safe as possible, and
Come back home
The US military folks have realized since before the Gulf War that young people are entering the military having spent hundreds or thousands of hours developing gaming skills.
This is potentially free training -- there's no way the military could possibly pay to train that many hours or train to that level of skill. And study after study has shown that gaming skills transfer over to combat situations, and that transfer of training is even more dramatic when combat displays and actions can be adapted to be more like their videogame counterparts.
What's more, military training is inherently dangerous, while videogaming seldom results in anything worse than a blister on your thumb.
Anybody who's thinking Ender's Game may be forgiven -- though Card had to spend an enormous amount of plot time developing a military and political situation where allowing Ender and friends to do their thing wasn't wildly improbable.
So keep on pushing them buttons. If you decide to help your country in warfare against its enemies, the skills you develop will raise your chances of coming back home.
why games develop combat skills
by
labradore
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Most of the computer and console games played today require one of the following three skill sets (often there is overlap):
Attack, dodge and maneuver.
Navigate and maneuver.
Strategize, direct (or engage) and react.
It also happens that these are the skill sets employed by soldiers in modern battles. The biggest difference between the real battlefield and a game is that the battlefield traditionally has required strength, endurance and discipline. The modern battlefield also requires a level of coodinated communication not yet matched in computer gaming.
Even further off topic: It is interesting that the we as a human species have survived and prospered by devloping and exploiting complex hunting skills and strategies. Most of the pre-history of the species was a 75,000 year territorial expansion over the over the surface of the dry earth. Humans did not develop agricultural resources until the climate and our populations stabilized enough to make farming an "obvious" alternative to hunting. Therefore we are the descendants of the last, most successful terrestrial hunters (note: we are not necessarily the most successful terrestrial hunters of all time because we just don't know). Our games frequently mimic hunting activities and our wars are the natural results of our competitive nature and our aptitude to kill. All predatory social species will develop conflicts between individuals AND groups.
It is easy to see that our games and our predatory activity and our conflicts will probably always be very similar. The other conclusion available from these details is that we are not really predisposed to live peaceful, stress-free lives. In fact, the pressure to live in an ordered, peaceful, structured society is fairly contrary to our natural tendencies. Perhaps this is one reason why societies tend to decay? It seems to me pretty comical that we have achieved total superiority over the other species on the planet and now we have turned our domination and predation against ourselves. Do the animals that were once our prey now quietly giggle among themselves when they see us kill eachother instead of them? Now we are consigned to struggle against our own nature and against our own wills to make peace. It seems almost an abomination to smother our greatest virtues. If we must make peace then I suppose we can use our skill to play games. In that light the playing of games is an extordinary savior of civilization. Our tendencies can be subverted. Civility can be maintained. Is this the noble role of the video game? Time will tell.
Re:Friendly fire
by
Slashamatic
·
· Score: 0, Interesting
More British soldiers were killed during the Gulf War due to 'friendly-fire' than by Iraqi action. The Canadian problem was not the first time and don't worry, they even inflict casualties on themselves. Their action isn't even restricted to war-time (remember that cable-car that was knocked down whilst the pilot was 'hot-dogging').
The military has its own share of idiots like any organisation, particularly a government one. As the US is one of the largest military forces in the world, it is likely that they have a larger number of idiots.
The use of hi-tech equipment actually frightens me because at some point the soldier/airman/sailor has to question his/her instruments and say "Is this reasonable?" and know when to ignore the information. Look at the incidnt tht happened during the battery replacement in a GPS.
Here's an example
by
revbob
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
offerors should emphasize
radical concepts that may contain high technical risk but
if enabled would have commensurate high military payoff.
These are typical words for a DARPA solicitation. The last thing DARPA wants to hear about is something you're pretty sure will work.
The problem space for this one is fairly prosaic in comparison to some recent ones (nanotech, weird biology, real AI), but the problems addressed (being absolutely sure you can communicate in a hostile and confusing environment, fighting on any randomly chosen battlefield like it's your home field, and weapons that will kill the bad guys but not the good guys) are first class Hard Problems.
Notice also that the amount of money they've got to spend on all three projects in this area is US$5M. Chicken feed. Shrinking budgets and a proper insistence that defense dollars show up on the battlefield preclude much else.
Slashdot Mirror
Sometime soon this military stuff will be availible for consumers wishing to build heavily ruggidized systems for their cars and ATVs. This is a very Good Thing, especially because it takes technology beyond what the main 90% need.
Oh shit! I forgot to click "Post Anonymously"...
Nvidia up after restatement, CFO splits
By Chris Kraeuter, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 4:15 PM ET April 29, 2002
SANTA CLARA, Calif. (CBS.MW) - Shares of Nvidia
jumped 17 percent Monday after announcing an
upward revision of earnings for the last
three years and better than expected targets
for the current quarter.
Also, the graphics chipmaker named Corporate
Controller Mary Dotz as interim CFO as
Christine Hoberg takes a "leave of absence."
Nvidia said it will conduct a search for a
permanent CFO.
Shares (NVDA: news, chart, profile) rose
$5.06 to $35.43 on Monday.
For the quarter ended in April, Nvidia said
it expects earnings of $79 million to $84
million, or 45 to 48 cents a share, on
revenue of $570 million to $580 million. This
outlook is ahead of Wall Street's consensus
projections for a profit of 42 cents a share
and revenue of $533.7 million.
As for the restatement, Nvidia will adjust
results for the first three quarters of 2002
and fiscal 2001 and 2000 upward by a total of
$1.3 million.
The restatement follows a review by the
company's independent audit committee. The
SEC had asked Nvidia to conduct a review.
Actually, for a while, the Marines had a custom version of Doom for training purposes!
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
I wonder how much interest they've shown in newer games like Rogue Spear or CounterStrike. Though I wonder how much cheaper/more effective a good paintball game would be for this type of training.
Yup.
Imagine yourself for a moment wearing a brass hat. You've got a stream of young civilians coming in to begin their military service. Your goal is to train those young people so that they:
The US military folks have realized since before the Gulf War that young people are entering the military having spent hundreds or thousands of hours developing gaming skills.
This is potentially free training -- there's no way the military could possibly pay to train that many hours or train to that level of skill. And study after study has shown that gaming skills transfer over to combat situations, and that transfer of training is even more dramatic when combat displays and actions can be adapted to be more like their videogame counterparts.
What's more, military training is inherently dangerous, while videogaming seldom results in anything worse than a blister on your thumb.
Anybody who's thinking Ender's Game may be forgiven -- though Card had to spend an enormous amount of plot time developing a military and political situation where allowing Ender and friends to do their thing wasn't wildly improbable.
So keep on pushing them buttons. If you decide to help your country in warfare against its enemies, the skills you develop will raise your chances of coming back home.
Most of the computer and console games played today require one of the following three skill sets (often there is overlap):
It also happens that these are the skill sets employed by soldiers in modern battles. The biggest difference between the real battlefield and a game is that the battlefield traditionally has required strength, endurance and discipline. The modern battlefield also requires a level of coodinated communication not yet matched in computer gaming.
Even further off topic: It is interesting that the we as a human species have survived and prospered by devloping and exploiting complex hunting skills and strategies. Most of the pre-history of the species was a 75,000 year territorial expansion over the over the surface of the dry earth. Humans did not develop agricultural resources until the climate and our populations stabilized enough to make farming an "obvious" alternative to hunting. Therefore we are the descendants of the last, most successful terrestrial hunters (note: we are not necessarily the most successful terrestrial hunters of all time because we just don't know). Our games frequently mimic hunting activities and our wars are the natural results of our competitive nature and our aptitude to kill. All predatory social species will develop conflicts between individuals AND groups.
It is easy to see that our games and our predatory activity and our conflicts will probably always be very similar. The other conclusion available from these details is that we are not really predisposed to live peaceful, stress-free lives. In fact, the pressure to live in an ordered, peaceful, structured society is fairly contrary to our natural tendencies. Perhaps this is one reason why societies tend to decay? It seems to me pretty comical that we have achieved total superiority over the other species on the planet and now we have turned our domination and predation against ourselves. Do the animals that were once our prey now quietly giggle among themselves when they see us kill eachother instead of them? Now we are consigned to struggle against our own nature and against our own wills to make peace. It seems almost an abomination to smother our greatest virtues. If we must make peace then I suppose we can use our skill to play games. In that light the playing of games is an extordinary savior of civilization. Our tendencies can be subverted. Civility can be maintained. Is this the noble role of the video game? Time will tell.
The military has its own share of idiots like any organisation, particularly a government one. As the US is one of the largest military forces in the world, it is likely that they have a larger number of idiots.
The use of hi-tech equipment actually frightens me because at some point the soldier/airman/sailor has to question his/her instruments and say "Is this reasonable?" and know when to ignore the information. Look at the incidnt tht happened during the battery replacement in a GPS.
Note the relevant words:
These are typical words for a DARPA solicitation. The last thing DARPA wants to hear about is something you're pretty sure will work.
The problem space for this one is fairly prosaic in comparison to some recent ones (nanotech, weird biology, real AI), but the problems addressed (being absolutely sure you can communicate in a hostile and confusing environment, fighting on any randomly chosen battlefield like it's your home field, and weapons that will kill the bad guys but not the good guys) are first class Hard Problems.
Notice also that the amount of money they've got to spend on all three projects in this area is US$5M. Chicken feed. Shrinking budgets and a proper insistence that defense dollars show up on the battlefield preclude much else.