Slashdot Mirror


DARPA Has $3.2M to Sniff You Out

quackking writes "The Army wants to sniff you out. This fedbizopps.gov link to a DARPA pre-RFRQ tells more. 'The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Advanced Technology Office (ATO), as part of the Odortype Detection Program, invites proposals to (1) determine whether genetically-determined odortypes can be used to identify specific individuals, and if so (2) to develop the science and enabling technology for detecting and identifying specific individuals by such odortypes. Total program funding for this effort will not exceed $3.2 million in FY 2003. Multiple awards are anticipated. Proposals are due by January 29, 2003.'"

6 of 217 comments (clear)

  1. STASI by micaiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This kind of reminds me of the East German's intelligence program of keeping people's scents on file. Maybe that will be next?

  2. Re:Sounds like a waste of 3.2m by Frymaster · · Score: 5, Insightful
    As it is, fingerprints, eye scans, and DNA are much better than smell

    not really. all the abovementioned methods require the participation of the identified person (well, you can lift someone's fingerprints from that wine glass... but to compare them you need to have good ink sheet ones).

    odour can be detected surreptitiously... say when passing through an airplane security gate, and the person can be identified without being aware of it. if someone scans your retina, you'll notice. if they pick up your smell with a hidden sniffer you won't.

    very insidious idea.

  3. Smells like an assassination device by Subcarrier · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A targeted anti-personnel mine comes to mind. Could be useful for taking out enemy commanders. A retreating force could leave these scattered in the bushes. Of course, they'd have to acquire some samples beforehand. Who does Saddam's laundry, by the way?

    --
    "I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them." -- George H. W. Bush
    1. Re:Smells like an assassination device by Cruciform · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You could base it off the local food supply...
      If soldiers were under orders to consume only MRE packs while in a Middle Easter location, then mines could be programmed to detect strong odors like curry, or other oft-used spices from the region.

      It could be used in reverse as well...
      You feed all your soldiers rations with heavy amounts of garlic. Everyone stinks but they can safely run though a minefield of combined motion/odor detectors. The pursuing enemy attempts to follow them in and is blown apart because their lack of key odor doesn't disable the mines.

  4. Why by Z0mb1eman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    My guess would be that this would be useful because scent, unlike appearance, is harder to alter. A wanted criminal can just put on some different clothes, maybe grow a beard, etc, and he won't be easily recognized - wear shades, a hat, and he won't be very easy to recognize with any sort of automated system. Other methods of identification - fingerprints or retinal scan - are difficult to apply without the target noticing (and cooperating). I could see machines at airports or bus terminals that "sniff out" anyone who passes by, and if the smell matches with any in its database, bingo... IF the technology works, it could be far more reliable than current methods.

    Of course, all this hinges on the idea that slapping on some cheap cologne won't confuse the machine. And I won't go into the privacy/1984/control etc. arguments...

    --
    ClutterMe.com - easiest site creation on the Net. Just click and type.
  5. Re:Sounds like a waste of 3.2m by Monkelectric · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Dogs do this all the time -- but HOW they do it is beyond me.

    There is a reason for this actually ... if I remember my freshman bio class, in the human brain the nose is "connected" to a center that controls emotion. This is why we are unable to apply any cognitive function to what we smell. Think about the other senses, we have developed complex language to describe them (blue, shiny, transluscent, iridescent... sharp, soft, prickly, sticky, coarse etc, there are also formalized words to describe sounds but I wont go into detail), but with smell there are really only a few words people used to describe a smell, "good" and "bad" most of the time.

    Dogs have alot more of their brain dedicated to their olfactory sensors (and I believe more sensors as well?). I wouldn't be surprised if dogs have abilities we don't like being able to recall a smell like we could recall sounds or images. I always thought it was weird that I could remember every note of "The great gig in the sky" and recall it at will as if I was listening to it, but ... I cant even remember what my last g/fs perfume smelled like unless I smell it.

    Maybe someone who knows more can give us more information

    --

    Religion is a gateway psychosis. -- Dave Foley