The Internet and The War

John Jorsett writes "Wired Magazine has an interesting article on the realities of the use of communication and navigation technology in the Iraq war. Particularly intriguing is the use of chat rooms to engage experts thousands of miles away in helping to solve problems at the troop level in the field. And if you think your admin job is tough, try running your servers in 125 degree heat in a sandstorm."

Comments

WSOOOOOAOAOH HNELLY

[Anonymous Coward]

Comment aborted. CowboyNeal is too fat.

Soldier Skills.

[villain170]

The military better watch itself -- if they start relying too heavily on technology, soldiers will lose the fundamental skills that make them unique.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Anonymous Coward]

The ability to carry a gun and follow orders?

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Cipster]

It's already happened in my field (medicine). Too many doctors rely on sophisticated lab tests rather than performing a good physical

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Timesprout]

Na with the automation of weapons and IRC communication it just means the recruiting adds will change their requirements to something like

Ability to work alone (usually forced)

Extensive experience in underground bunkers (parents basement is acceptable)

Ability to type 80 wpm

Extensive experience with RTS and FPS games

Childish desire to hit back at society for rejecting your inept social skills by attempting to achieve global domination

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Jonny Ringo]

Right. Like smoking weed, dancing with each other and talking about how war is hell.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[SpaceCadetTrav]

Very insightful. I bet the Pentagon never thought of this!

Re:Soldier Skills.

[villain170]

Obviously they did, but that still doesn't change the fact that technology, most notably GPS, is going to replace the basic map reading skills.

Basic Training may not change much from what it is now; however, once soldiers get to their units and they see their officers using their fancy GPS machines, they are going to wonder why they ever learned how to read a stupid old paper map in the first place. That's when the military is going to be in trouble.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Planesdragon]

The military better watch itself -- if they start relying too heavily on technology, soldiers will lose the fundamental skills that make them unique.

Yeah, like swordfighting--er...

I mean, yeah, like how to fire a musket line--no, wait...

Trenches! Must not forget trenches!

The history of war is a history of technology progressing, progressing, and progressing. The "war-fighter" (i.e., "solider, salior, marine, or pilot") doesn't have a job of reading maps and following trails--their job is to fight and win.

Sure, your networked rifle squad could lose its GPS uplink--but that's no different than having your map burnt away from you.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you actually read the article? It says that they are still taught to follow compass and map readings. They're not going to throw reliable methods out.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[LittleLebowskiUrbanA]

That's why the military has riflemen and it has IT guys. However, the IT guys need to keep their basic rifleman skills honed so they go to a basic infantry skills course once a year at least in the Marine Corps.
Depends on the individual, really.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[GlassHeart]

Sure, your networked rifle squad could lose its GPS uplink--but that's no different than having your map burnt away from you.

Nonsense. It's far easier (though still difficult, obviously) to shoot down a dozen satellites - or just jam their transmissions effectively - than to find each paper map in an enemy army of 100,000 troops and burn them. Need to reproduce a map? Find a photocopy machine, or make a quick sketch by hand!

Technology is great, but it's not without risks. The warning against over-reliance on technology is a valid one.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[AHumbleOpinion]

The military better watch itself -- if they start relying too heavily on technology, soldiers will lose the fundamental skills that make them unique.

I wouldn't worry. Marines refer to the 7 inch combat knife as the most reliable weapon they carry since it has no moving parts and no electronics. The Army still has a bayonet course in basic training, they still teach land navigation with map and compass. Some Navy quartermasters can still plot a position with sextant and chronometer. Much of basic training still emphasizes the mental and the physical.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[echucker]

A concept that I'd always idly wondered about at a younger age....

Weapons (and armor) are constantly in a race to stay ahead of each other. Longbows vs. cavalry, the zweihander vs. the pike, mail vs. slashing weapons.... As technology advances, it must always be retroactively effective against previous applications. Just imagine the beautiful irony though, if a helicopter's armor was immune to a laser, but a rock hurled from a sling knock it out of the sky?

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Dun Malg]

I wouldn't worry. Marines refer to the 7 inch combat knife as the most reliable weapon they carry since it has no moving parts and no electronics. The Army still has a bayonet course in basic training, they still teach land navigation with map and compass. Some Navy quartermasters can still plot a position with sextant and chronometer. Much of basic training still emphasizes the mental and the physical.

And don't forget the Air Force! They still learn to make their beds by hand and walk together in a straight line. Also, on one day of their training, they go out to a rifle range and are shown which end of the M-16 is the dangerous one, so that if they happen upon one they won't accidentally kill someone.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[villain170]

Yes. But skills like using a bayonet and land navigation skills are perishable.. if not practiced, they will be lost. With all these gizmos and widgets, soldiers don't get the opportunity to get their hands dirty with the good old way of doing things.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[hobbesmaster]

Isn't that somewhat saying that you don't need guns because you already have bayonets? And when your gun jams, you're going for that bayonet anyway so lets just skip the guns.

And then centralized command and control; knock that out and theres nobody to control the armies! So lets just throw everyone out there and say "conquer the nation" and it'll all work out!

More or less the same line of reasoning. I'd expect a squad to react to losing his GPS the same way he'd react to losing their comms or running out of ammunition....

Anyway, when did using faulty technology stop the military in the past? I seem to recall an absurd rate of duds in USN torpedos during WWII...

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Dun Malg]

Basic Training may not change much from what it is now; however, once soldiers get to their units and they see their officers using their fancy GPS machines, they are going to wonder why they ever learned how to read a stupid old paper map in the first place. That's when the military is going to be in trouble.

You're looking at it wrong. GPS units aren't used as replacements for maps. They're used to supplement them. GPS doesn't show terrain features, so planning unit movements still often requires separate maps. Even if these maps are kept totally online someday, the ability to READ a map will still have to be taught. Basic military training will always include basic navigation skills.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[OMEGA Power]

Just imagine the beautiful irony though, if a helicopter's armor was immune to a laser, but a rock hurled from a sling knock it out of the sky?

Something close to this actually happened in Vietnam where the US military helicopter people concentrated their R+D money on aviods SAM and AA fire and left a major (I believe it was a expoosed fuel line but don't quote me on that) that allowed farmers to shoot down US choppers with their old hunting rifles (something that actually happened on a semi-regular basis).

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's not over-exaggerate the dust problem.
Fighter engines are largely unaffected, for example. The light grit blast simply cleans the blades and stators!
I've deployed for over two years cumulative to various Gulf bases from Desert Shield/Storm to present, and as far as USAF gear is concerned the dust is merely an annoyance.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Planesdragon]

As technology advances, it must always be retroactively effective against previous applications. Just imagine the beautiful irony though, if a helicopter's armor was immune to a laser, but a rock hurled from a sling knock it out of the sky?

You don't think that they consider hurling rocks?

What, exactly, do you think small arms fire is? Don't expect firearms to go away any sooner than the sword did--and, remember that, in essential fashion, the sword is still a standard piece of equipment in many military units.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[oaf357]

Because GPS often fails.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Anonymous Coward]

One little problem with your example. Want to bet their carrying paper (Laminated or something) maps as well? Not to mention several other ways they have to communicate. Like say the fact that the jamming resistant encrypted communications equipment they use hops frequencies every second or so and sounds like static unless you have the right equipment and codes so you have to jam all frequencies to be sure you get the right one. BTW If you are putting out that much energy an Air Force pilot will be more then happy to acquaint you with a HARM missile and you are back to your original situation not to mention just for the sake of discussion if you did jam every frequency at once the most you will do is slow things down a little. The observation craft are still tracking every move everything in their area makes. And you will be operating under the same handicap...
Still not anyplace I would want to be. But that is just me.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Some Navy quartermasters can still plot a position with sextant and chronometer."

Ho man have you ever seen the books of equations that you have to have to do that?? The feat is low tech but very cool none the less.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[operagost]

I'll try not to mistake your vehicle for the enmy when I'm strafing armor lines with my A-10.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Ignorant Aardvark]

Just imagine the beautiful irony though, if a helicopter's armor was immune to a laser, but a rock hurled from a sling knock it out of the sky?

ROCK?! Screw that. How about a fucking BULLET?!
Nobody is stupid enough to make a helicopter out of mirrors that work perfectly well against beam weapons but fail against ballistic attacks, because 99.9% of what the enemy is using is gonna be ballistic. The Middle-Eastern countries we've fought against have had technology decades outdated. Assuming that the laser weapon was magically invented today, how many decades do you think it would take the less technologically advanced to get their hands on some? The point being, I can't imagine a situation where a slingthrower is more dangerous than the billions of firearms out there.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[zilly]

Look, why exactly will the military be in trouble when they begin relying on GPS instead of paper maps? Presumably there's some advantage to all this newfangled technology over reading paper maps, else they wouldn't be training soldiers to use these GPS gizmos.

If your argument is that the military shouldn't rely on technology because technology is inherently unreliable, then you may have a point -- but do note that the Pentagon isn't stupid, at least not when it comes to training its soldiers, and it will have prepared them well for the eventuality of a technological failure. In fact, the article specifically mentions that soldiers are trained in how to read paper maps in case GPS fails.

Arguing that technology shouldn't be adopted because it causes basic skills to atrophy is like arguing that society should never have moved past the hunter-gatherer stage because today, in the age of specialization, hardly anyone knows anymore how to kill, skin and roast a beast with their bare hands.

May I also point out that even GPS mapping units require the user to know how to read a map.

humbly yours

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Mr. Haiku]

oh ignorant 'vark you are not versed in the ways of the metaphor

Re:Soldier Skills.

[sql*kitten]

Just imagine the beautiful irony though, if a helicopter's armor was immune to a laser, but a rock hurled from a sling knock it out of the sky?

That's pretty much what happened in Somalia, modern helicopters came under attack from untrained men armed with WW2-era bolt-action rifles. Of course, only Nicholas de Genova would describe that as "beautiful".

Re:Soldier Skills.

[petecarlson]

It is not the ability to follow orders but the ability to disregard orders that makes the US Army great. Under it's structured skin, the Army is a chaotic mess. You get used to adapting orders and mission to the changing situation. When you go from training to war, the only difference is that during real wars you get better stuff to play with.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[echucker]

Actually, the Blackhawks were shot down with rocket-propelled grenades, and the populace was primarily armed with the AK family of assault rifles. Hardly bolt-action weapons.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Anonymous Coward]

Him and the Canadian Infantry as well please

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Ozymandias_KoK]

GPS is an auxillary tool. If they have a map, they drive on. Comms are the same way, more a nice option than necessity. Ammo -- ok, a whole lot less so. You need that. :) You make it seem as if there's some bit of a problem they will just give up and go home. It doesn't work that way.

Don't misunderstand me as saying those items don't go into the force multiplier category, giving an advantage, just saying their lack can be worked around for your average mission.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[av8tors32]

Ever try to navigate off a map in the middle of a desert. Its a lot harder than you might think since there are no permanent terrain features to reference. Wanna make it harder? Try doing 25 ft off the ground traveling at 125mph.

The reason we manuvered through the desert so quickly? GPS!

Re:Soldier Skills.

[av8tors32]

I hate to break this too you, but making a helicopter immunue to firearms makes it too heavy to fly. Until there is a MAJOR advancement in bulletproof composites helicopters will continue to be brought down by simple bullets. Lets not even talk about what happeneds when bullets engage the rotor system. ( a simple rock thrown into a rotor blade will make a hole which will cause an inbalance in the system...)

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Anonymous Coward]

That is of course because it only takes the Air Force one day to figure out which is the dangerous end vs Marines and Army which need up to 2 weeks before they are allowed to actually use bullets in their rifles.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[InternalWave]

Although I am now in IT, I spent 6 years in the USMC as a forward observer. 1986-92. Even then we had a fair amount of digital technology - MULEs (Modular Universal Laser Equipments) for lasing and designation (with a built-in inertial north-finding module), DCTs (Digital Communications Terminals), DMDs (Digital Message Devices), PLRS (Position Locating and Reporting System), BCS (Battery Computer System), and lots of crypto gear, plus your VHF/HF/UHF radios.

It was theoretically possible even in the late '80's (as in, 15 years ago) to conduct a fire mission without ever speaking into a radio. Lase the target with your MULE, type in the fire mission on your DMD or DCT, which is connected to the radio and crypto gear...the BCS gets it automatically, and the Fire Direction Center does its thing. AFAIK they may actually have adopted the gun position digital terminals that were being tested at the time, also.

Naturally, things like MLRS (Multiple Launch Rocket System) are digitalized to the max.

I don't know how things are now, but at least then we still relied on map and compass and binoculars (as forward observers). One EMP pulse and all that fancy stuff goes Poof. And the fire direction people practised a fair amount with firing boards and paper gunnery tables.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Dun Malg]

I'll try not to mistake your vehicle for the enmy when I'm strafing armor lines with my A-10.

[backpedal mode]
Air Force PILOTS, partucularly Close Air Support, are clearly highly trained and those of us with the infantry think they're the best! We grunts only made fun of the ENLISTED folks in blue.
[/backpedal mode]

Seriously, though, we never did get a good answer out of any of the airmen we asked about it: what do they do for six weeks besides learn to march in formation and make their bunks? The Air Force always struck me as weird because the actual combatants are mostly officers, leaving the vast majority of enlisted airmen as simply support staff. Not to say that support staff is unimportant, but in the Army everyone is given basic infantry training because (war being what it is) it often comes down to two groups of people with small arms shooting at one another and even support troops end up in combat (as evidenced by our POWs from a Maintenance battalion). Marines? Same thing, only more so. Navy? I'm sure all Navy personnel are trained to be sailors, whatever that entails nowadays. But the Air Force enlistees? Before they're trained in their specialty, what are they?

Re:Soldier Skills.

[dbrutus]

My wife (an internist from Romania) says the same thing. Nobody who studied in the US in her resident program knew how to properly use a stethascope. They were all shipping patients out for MRI and other expensive diagnostic tests when the foreign medical residents were listening and diagnosing the same case with a $150 stethascope because that was the highest level of technology available back home in most cases.

I always thought the solution was simple, get HMO's to pony up $1,000,000 for a yearly prize in a stethascope using contest open to residents only. The medical debt burdened residents all across the US would jump at the chance to get their debts paid and have a nest egg to start a debt free private practice. The HMOs would get an appreciable down-tick in the use of expensive tests to diagnose simple conditions and make their money back very quickly. It would be win-win all the way around.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[dbrutus]

One of the things that everyone's overlooking here is that the armed forces are cut to the bone. Officers and soldiers *are buying their own technology* because there isn't enough money around for the government to buy it for them. That was clear enough from the article.

As time goes on and the budget is better aligned to our needs we're going to end up buying a lot more ruggedized equipment that can stand 150 degree temperatures and be issued to everybody so that you can't just take out one node and the unit's out of touch. The same process of disaster repair that makes taking down the Internet so tough is going to be replicated with each individual soldier being a potential transmission node. The chain of command will be used to hold down traffic/noise but as links get blown out due to enemy action, that 2nd lt who ends up formally controlling a company will have the information flows necessary to do the job and the equipment necessary to handle those info flows.

We're in a major transition period and the vision I outlined isn't going to happen for 10 years or so. The key is keeping our military lead so that as we move from a fragile network to a robust distributed network we don't get a lot of soldiers unneccessarily killed along the way.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[GlassHeart]

Isn't that somewhat saying that you don't need guns because you already have bayonets?

I didn't say you don't need the GPS. I'm saying you shouldn't grow over-reliant on the GPS, because it has its own different risk vectors. I was implicitly saying that you should learn to use both and carry both. You don't need to look too far in the past for an example. The biggest humiliation to the US in the Iraq war started with a convoy taking a wrong turn. (I'm not saying the GPS is to blame, just that the consequences of GPS failure can be severe without a backup solution.)

For your example, soldiers should still learn hand-to-hand combat, because their weapons could in fact malfunction or run out of ammunition.

More or less the same line of reasoning.

No, you're just suffering from a form of faulty reasoning called a false dichotomy. Saying that GPS is riskier than paper maps, because it has a more centralized point of failure, does not mean it's not a useful tool when it is working. You just have to be aware that it is vulnerable, and you need to have a backup plan.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Anonymous Coward]

>>> GPS doesn't show terrain features

Not necessarily true. I have the Magellan (Meridian Platinum) with Topology maps in extended memory. Great for hiking and rock climbing.

The map can show features up to a few feet (3-7). The US Survey Topo software I got is usually within 10-15' (50' elevation steps). In Hawaii a few months ago my GPS was better than the map I had. The biggest discrepancies occur with plants/forest that moves over the years.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Shoggoth of Maul]

hey bill look whle i own this fag.
LOLOLOLZ, awp his ass

The future of warfare. God I hope we develop robots soon.

Re:Soldier Skills.

[Shoggoth of Maul]

Of course, that could all change if you're in direct contact with your CO all the time. We have to be careful not to cull that initiative out of our soldiers by giving them a too-convenient safety net.

Heh, the use of chat rooms...

[craenor]

A/S/L - 19 iraqi single male, looking for sniper...

Re:Heh, the use of chat rooms...

[the_real_tigga]

Who the fuck are the four people who modded this funny?

Not only is it a weak joke, it's a joke about people getting killed.

But I guess that's OK as long as it's not people working in the WTC, right?

Re:Heh, the use of chat rooms...

[JohnFluxx]

"Fuck you! I think killing is hilarious. Don't tell me not to joke about killing." - very-para quote of george carlin.

Re:Heh, the use of chat rooms...

[cL0h]

Not at all. You can joke about people getting killed in the World Trade Centre. You can joke about 6000 Africans dying of malnutrition related disease everyday thanks to the global economic imbalance. You can joke about whatever you want and if a moderator finds that funny they can mod it up. That's the way it goes.

moron the fairytail wagging the blog

[Anonymous Coward]

yuk. both the murdering parts, & all the phonIE scriptdead ?pr? spew, are just whoreabull.

Degree of difficulty

[Gizzmonic]

And if you think your admin job is tough, try running your servers in 125 degree heat in a sandstorm."

Would that be more or less difficult than bullseying womprats from a Landspeeder? 'Cause I used to do that all the time back home, isnt' that right, goofy mustache guy who's about to be killed?

In Australia...

[more fool you]

We cook our lunches on the servers. We left a 2U gap so we could also have grills.

Re:In Australia...

[fredrikj]

We cook our lunches on the servers. We left a 2U gap so we could also have grills.

Here in Sweden, the extra heat from computers is just about enough to evaporate oxygen. Overclocking is a necessary means of survival during the winters.

Re:In Australia...

[cruppel]

In America our oxygen is evaporated at room temperature...

Re:In Australia...

[Golthar]

In soviet russia oxygen evaporates you at room temperature

Re:In Australia...

[Anonymous Coward]

That was the point.

Can't be true.

[caluml]

Suspect chemical attack, he types into a Microsoft Chat session running on the tactical Internet, the military's battlefield communications system.

Tell me this isn't true? The US military resort to Microsoft Chat to communicate a possible chemical attack? Surely they'd have some custom chat software with some heavy duty encryption in it?

Re:Can't be true.

[aexandria]

There are other ways to textually relay information where data is typed in on a laptop, passed through and encryption device, and then through a radio up to the satellite to different participants, depending on the amount of addresses put in by the originator.

Re:Can't be true.

[NialScorva]

The network stack itself is encrypted on a connection basis, thus "tactical Internet".

Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[HidingMyName]

Several things come to mind reading this. For one thing, they appear to be using Microsoft Chat over the internet to communicate reconnaissance information. Whether such communication is secure is something I'd really like the govt. to think about, if not it could be putting soldiers at risk. One thing that is mission critical is tech support, and apparently they have a top tier (premier?) support from Microsoft. I wonder if anybody short of say IBM could offer a competing Open Source (*BSD or Linux) based solution?

Re:Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[SchnauzerGuy]

I'm sure that there is encryption at the network layer (ala IPSEC or VPN), so using an unencrypted application layer program (like MS Chat) isn't a problem.

Re:Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[sean23007]

Yup, that really would put our soldiers at risk in the event of a chemical attack...

Soldier's communication: ...chemical attack in progress. Need help.

Enemy SIGINT operator who intercepts the transmission: Oh my god! They're getting attacked with chemical weapons! I feel like I didn't already know that...

Re:Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[robi2106]

Did you bother to read and pay attention to the article? The net they use isn't even physically / logically connected to The Internet. They are two totally independant networks.

The difference with "Sipper" is that it's basically a far-flung local area network. To maximize security, it doesn't connect with the Internet proper.

robi

Re:Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[_ph1ux_]

"One thing that is mission critical is tech support..."

I have this image of a WWII Medic running out to a downed soldier - only hes not a medic and its not a downed soldier.

Its a Tech Support engineer running out to fix some guys comm-palm or something... holding his helmet with one hand, running back and forth half hunched over carrying his little black computer toolkit in one hand. His battle worn glasses "field repaired" with 100-mile-an-hour tape, from the helicopter unit he flew in on.

As he makes his way to the downed uplink device - shots whiz by his head nearly hitting him as he managed to fall/duck behind whats left of a wall.

He can hear the screams from the soldier who is wearing the impaired device - screaming for information because he is now effectively blinded without the use of his comm-palm. His skills all too reliant on the technology of the modern military. His skills now a casuality of the ever progressive technological revolution.

Hopefully though, if a tech can get there in time - he'll be online quick enough to save his ass after the refresh of intel....

Re:Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[JDWTopGuy]

I commend you on the good writing, you should consider writing a short story or something.

But how stupid do you think the military is? IF the soldier was THAT dependent on the device, he/she would be supplied with a backup. Anybody with military experience please correct/confirm this, but don't many soldiers in the field carry some kind of handgun in addition to whatever rifle/machinegun/etc is their primary weapon?

Anyway, I really don't think they're going to be that dependent anytime soon because of the exact danger you detail here. As the whole world saw in the recent whooping of Saddam's regime, much of war can now be fought via air/special ops., which make the environment much safer for ground troops. Granted, we had a massive advantage in Iraq (Iraqi forces weren't 100% loyal, the regime didn't have the ability to strike us at home with anything, etc.), so it would be different if we were fighting say, China, but nonetheless, ground war is safer for us now than in WW2 (duh!). It's possible that by the time we move in on the ground, there's not much left to do, other than claim & protect the area.

Re:Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[ktakki]

Anybody with military experience please correct/confirm this, but don't many soldiers in the field carry some kind of handgun in addition to whatever rifle/machinegun/etc is their primary weapon

Sidearms are issued only to officers and some NCOs (modulo Specfor, MPs, and other specialized units). Your average grunt has only his M4 (the updated M-16), and usually only two per Army squad carry the M203 grenade launcher (that device that's clamped under the M4's barrel).

There's always your bayonet, but the last US Army bayonet charge was 1951, during the Korean War. "Fix bayonets!" is the last thing you want to hear.

Ammo load is typically between 120 and 200 rounds. The prime consideration is water. All that ammo and weaponry is useless on a dehydrated soldier.

k.

Re:Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[Redking]

No, the average grunt still has an M-16A2. One out of a four soldiers carries the M203 grenade launcher and one person out of an eight man squad carries a M249 SAW (hench, Squad Automatic Weapon). Four squads roughly make up a platoon sized element and in each platoon there are one or two M60 (7.62 cal crew based machine gun) gunners depending on the mission and expected opposition.

Its plenty of firepower to cover your ass if something goes wrong with your weapon. Typical battle drills are done so that soldiers can diagnose weapon problems in under 30 seconds. Very rarely will a soldier have to switch weapons and they can't exactly pick up another soldier's weapons and use them in combat right away because they have to zero the weapon sights to their personal line of sight.

Oh and don't put down the bayonet. ;)

Re:Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[sql*kitten]

things come to mind reading this. For one thing, they appear to be using Microsoft Chat over the internet to communicate reconnaissance information. Whether such communication is secure is something I'd really like the govt. to think about, if not it could be putting soldiers at risk.

Microsoft chat, like almost everything else they do, is really a toolkit for building your own applications on. It can be hardened and deployed to communicate sensitive financial and corporate data, as necessary.

One thing that is mission critical is tech support, and apparently they have a top tier (premier?) support from Microsoft. I wonder if anybody short of say IBM could offer a competing Open Source (*BSD or Linux) based solution?

Sun have a large contract for tactical computing systems with the US Army; I can only assume that it was too expensive to deploy Tadpoles in the field. And no matter what anyone says, a Dell laptop running the OEM install of Windows is far easier to support than the same laptop running Linux, if only because Dell have done more testing and have more techs with experience. That may change someday, but it's how it is for now.

Re:Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[dbrutus]

When your C3I system is largely shut down due to US actions, you might not know that. You might also not know which two of the recepients of the three chem attack missions are receiving the attentions of their only two cleanup units and target those two for followup action thus degrading their cleanup capabilities.

Re:Military Relies on Microsoft Technology

[Svobodin]

No, the average grunt still has an M-16A2. One out of a four soldiers carries the M203 grenade launcher and one person out of an eight man squad carries a M249 SAW (hench, Squad Automatic Weapon). Four squads roughly make up a platoon sized element and in each platoon there are one or two M60 (7.62 cal crew based machine gun) gunners depending on the mission and expected opposition.

Whoa! A little behind the times, eh? These days, most line units issue the M4 carbine instead of the M16-A2. And I think only the National Guard still uses the M60; the Army started moving to the M240B several years ago.

OMG

[(54)T-Dub]

Caddell leads the way to one of the shipping containers. Inside, two soldiers baby-sit three rows of Sun servers. "This is where the Global Command and Control System lives," Caddell says. GCCS - known as "Geeks" to soldiers in the field - is the military's HAL 9000. It's an umbrella system that tracks every friendly tank, plane, ship, and soldier in the world in real time, plotting their positions as they move on a digital map.

Re:OMG

[caluml]

every friendly tank, plane, ship, and soldier in the world in real time,

I think "every" might be a slight exaduration. But seriously, does that extend to allied forces, cos we (British) always seem to take a lot of hits from people allegedly on the same side as us. :o(

And also, it's all very well having two soldeirs guarding it, but what happens if a missile lands right on top of them. You need them separated by a few miles.

Re:OMG

[Red Warrior]

Well, a few of us are still carrying a grudge from that whole tea tax thing.

Re:OMG

[caluml]

Yeah, since I've been a Slashdot-ite I've noticed that. Some of you keep weapons in your houses in case King George (was it George) decides to come and try and take back the former renegade coloney too...

Re:OMG

[Cyno]

We should know exactly where everything is at all times, including the missles. But that's military intelligence for ya.

Re:OMG

[Anonymous Coward]

It wouldn't have to be King George. Any old brit, spic, chink, nigger, wop, frog, gook, redskin, kraut, or the like would do. Good shootin', all of them! Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeehaw!

Re:OMG

[Red Warrior]

King George, his heirs or assigns, or any other jerks who feel that what's mine is thiers. But that's a flame for a different day. :-P~~

Re:OMG

[(54)T-Dub]

Further down in the article the exaggeration is revealed:

About a quarter of the trucks in this convoy have GCCS

The system is still really powerfull though:

One zoom out and I'm looking at the entire Baghdad region. Another zoom out and I see all of Iraq, with forces dotted in the north and heavily clumped around the capital in the center. One more click and I'm looking at the entire sphere of Central Command, from the edge of Libya to Pakistan. I see forces in Turkey, and clustered in Iraq and Kuwait. I feel like a four-star general. I'm sitting in the Iraqi desert looking at troop movements across 25 countries.

Re:OMG

[meringuoid]

One zoom out and I'm looking at the entire Baghdad region. Another zoom out and I see all of Iraq, with forces dotted in the north and heavily clumped around the capital in the center. One more click and I'm looking at the entire sphere of Central Command, from the edge of Libya to Pakistan. I see forces in Turkey, and clustered in Iraq and Kuwait. I feel like a four-star general. I'm sitting in the Iraqi desert looking at troop movements across 25 countries.

Sounds like a disaster waiting to happen to me. That sort of information just should NOT be so easily available. Real-time updates on the entire strategic situation, available to regular goons on the front line? You'd better not bring that along when you go up against any opposition that actually fights; just let one of these things get captured and the whole plan's compromised.

Re:OMG

[glitch23]

I think "every" might be a slight exaduration.

Would that be similar to an exabyte but bigger? Or should I ask how long an exaduration lasts?

Re:OMG

[carpe_noctem]

we (British) always seem to take a lot of hits from people allegedly on the same side as us.

Hey, at least the patriot missiles actually worked this war!

Re:OMG

[spruce]

Considering the Americans had the majority of the troops and therefore did a majority of the fighting, I guess it follows that the majority of friendly fire incidents were caused by Americans. Then again, it's not like the Brits are immune: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2886715.stm

While I honestly appreciate the help of the Brits, I've seen this complaint a few times, and we don't really need our friends to rub salt in already embarrassing and painful events.

Re:OMG

[Karl_Hungus]

Or should I ask how long an exaduration lasts?

Sounds like a long time, but really isn't ;)

Re:OMG

[thebigmacd]

As the article states, the system resets behind a secure password when the vehicle is turned off, and standard procedure is to incinerate the vehicle with a grenade if captured.

Re:OMG

[DNS-and-BIND]

Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun.

Re:OMG

[DNS-and-BIND]

Which of course suggests that this will always occur. The bad guys just capture it intact and keep the motor running. Or else just break into the network...before anyone screams 'cryptographically secure' it's always humans who do these things. And the U.S. in particular has a bad record of its people selling it out, heck the head of the FBI counterintelligence unit was a spy. The #1 intelligence adviser on Cuba was a spy for the Cubans. Lonetree, Ames, the Walkers, ad nauseum.

Re:OMG

[tigga]

Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than my gun.

So what's the point of having gun if not kill people?

Re:OMG

[Anonymous Coward]

> from people allegedly on the same side as us.

Um, well, there's something I've been meaning to tell you ....

Since England is no longer a sovereign nation but America's colony in Europe (which makes Blair the viceroy?) it seems likely that we will have to think in another way about this. Natives are of course not real Americans and thus much more expendable.

Re:OMG

[Ozymandias_KoK]

You could point it at them, and their not wanting to die might make them more amenable to your point of view, at least in the short term?

Re:OMG

[Ozymandias_KoK]

Keep in mind people will see only what they "need" to see, and that platoon level elements won't have full battle plans or theatre level information that a general would have access to.

Re:OMG

[Anonymous Coward]

Until they go home to get theirs.

Re:OMG

[andyt]

You could point it at them, and their not wanting to die might make them more amenable to your point of view, at least in the short term?

Of course, if I thought that might happen, then I'd want a gun too, just so I could point it back.

Waaaaiiiiiit a second.....

Re:OMG

[andyt]

Considering the Americans had the majority of the troops and therefore did a majority of the fighting, I guess it follows that the majority of friendly fire incidents were caused by Americans. Then again, it's not like the Brits are immune: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2886715.stm

True. Of course, one might argue that while the Iraqis did have tanks, what they did not have was any kind of air force.

A friendly tank being hit is unfortunate. A friendly plane being hit... well that is a lot less defensible.

Re:OMG

[DNS-and-BIND]

YHBT. YHL. HAND.

Re:OMG

[dbrutus]

The Swiss are more armed than the US who are more armed than the UK. The crime rates are inversely proportional with Switzerland being most safe, the US holding the median ground and the UK being least safe.

Does this make you think a bit?

A further thought, until the UK in recent years went on a disarmament binge, it had a much lower crime rate. How many graves in the UK are needlessly filled each year because of that is for others to study. For some reason the UK government has declined to make a study of it.

Man,

[Anonymous Coward]

This site sucks. Anbody know a site like it, but interesting?

BBQ!

[The Bungi]

Suspect chemical attack, he types into a Microsoft Chat session running on the tactical Internet, the military's battlefield communications system. Multiple dead sheep by side of road. Pls advise.

A1 sauce and your tank's exhaust. pls send wingz the commander replies.

Re:BBQ!

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, sheep don't have "wingz".

Re:BBQ!

[Anonymous Coward]

Nor do buffalo.

Re:BBQ!

[commodoresloat]

He misspelled "nuggets."

Re:BBQ!

[Malfourmed]

Suspect chemical attack ... Multiple dead sheep by side of road. Pls advise.

A1 sauce and your tank's exhaust. pls send wingz the commander replies.

If those sheep have wings is that evidence of use of nuclear WMDs?

Re:BBQ!

[g0at]

Sheep have wings?

Re:BBQ!

[The Bungi]

Sheep have wings?

No, but neither do buffalo.

Re:BBQ!

[Darby]

Sheep have wings?

No, but neither do buffalo.

But "Sheep" isn't the name of a city in New York either.

Montana? Maybe.

Re:BBQ!

[poot_rootbeer]

As if sheep that had been killed by toxic chemicals wasn't appetizing enough, let's cook it by subjecting it to a jet of high-temperature carbon monoxide gas! Good Eats!

A1 sauce though? Yuck.

Try

[Anonymous Coward]

And if you think your admin job is tough, try running your servers in 125 degree heat in a sandstorm.

Or try getting occupied and shot at in 125 degree heat in a sandstorm.

visit florida

[DaLiNKz]

Gets hot down here, especially when the computers are on and A/C is off.. I have yet to crack a processor though..

RTFA

[(54)T-Dub]

"Welcome to Siprnet," he says. GCCS runs over Siprnet - the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network - in the same way that Web applications run over the public Internet. The difference with "Sipper" is that it's basically a far-flung local area network. To maximize security, it doesn't connect with the Internet proper. But it links Centcom to the battlefield and, among other things, allows Franks to talk to Rumsfeld and President Bush via two-way videoconference every evening.

Re:RTFA

[caluml]

Hard on the outside, soft on the inside?
And what happens when an Iraqi captures one of these Sipper sets? He can listen in to Rumsfeld and Bush?
Encryption should be between the two endpoints, IMO, like IPSec.

Re:RTFA

[L7_]

Its not connected to the internet... yet soldiers are required to use MS Online help to diagnose and solve problems.

How are they connecting to MS Online help if not through the internet?

Re:RTFA

[SpaceCadetTrav]

Wow I bet they never thought of that! +5 insightful!

Re:RTFA

[flabbergast]

It appears they have to pay for the "Premier" help and perhaps make a phone call (I doubt that though)

"'I consult Microsoft online help,' he replies. 'We have Premier help,' he adds, referring to the live operators available to subscribers only."

On a side note, you can have another computer that's not hooked up to SIPR that's hooked up the Internet to search MS help. This soldier is not in the field, he's the "help desk." His/her job is to help fix computers: soldiers in battle communicate over GCCS which runs over SIPR. RTFA

Re:RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, encryption between endpoints? The NSA could use your expertise, you should apply.

Re:RTFA

[KrispyKringle]

Again, according to the article, procedure is that if a humvee or truck equipped with one of these units is surrounded, the driver is to turn off the ignition, which shuts down the computer, requireing a password to restart. However, you obviously have to wonder what happens if, say, the driver is sniped but the computer left intact. Some sort of timed logout, while-using-biometric-authentication, or deadman switch seems the best answer, I suppose. Of course, the same vulnerability applies to radios, apparently without many ill effects.

Re:RTFA

[caluml]

OK, so they did probably think of that before.
But explain to me how you think it works then.

Re:RTFA

[Svobodin]

On the FBCB2 project, SOP was to "zero" the harddrive using a built-in switch, then smash the screen if compromise was certain. But even if they were to get hold of one, and if the average Iraqi is anywhere near as smart as the average American GI, it'd take him a while to make sense of the damned thing. In that time, we're busy pushing out new comsec to secure any future transmissions.

Re:RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

wtf.. insightful? this is fuckin retarded its dumbshit moderators that make /. suck

Re:RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

SIPRNet is one of several DoD operated internets that are physically separate from The Internet(tm), but use the same technology (TCP/IP, DNS, HTTP web servers, etc.) Interconnections between physically secure LANs are over dedicated point-to-point facilities that are bulk encrypted with hardware. It is used for very low-level classified information ("SECRET"). (This level of classification is used for information like today's weather forecast, as opposed to, say, the launch codes for nuclear missiles.) There's also a "sensitive" but unclassified version called NIPRNet, again physically separate. The military likes air gaps.

Owning the crypto box does you no good without the key sets. In fact, I think the SIPR crypto is compatible with the old KG-84s which John Walker gave away so long ago. As with software, it doesn't matter if the algorithm is known.

I expect the keys are routinely changed daily for this application based on similar levels of security for other purposes, but I don't really know.

Nothing about the network architecture prohibits using other levels of encryption at other layers in the protocol stack. You can still use IPSec, SSL, SSH, web site passwords, ROT13, and all that to your hearts' content. SIPRNet just provides data link encryption.

The bit about Rumsfeld and Franks teleconferencing is probably fluff. If true, they may well have had additional crypto on either end. Or not; it might've been along the lines of "How's it going, Tommy? Fine, sir, fine."

Re:RTFA

[Scott Hale]

it's basically a far-flung local area network

Yea... we call those wide area networks.

Re:RTFA

[Svobodin]

The bit about Rumsfeld and Franks teleconferencing is probably fluff. If true, they may well have had additional crypto on either end. Or not; it might've been along the lines of "How's it going, Tommy? Fine, sir, fine."

These days, BDE-level TOCs commonly use VTC to deliver their SitReps to higher.

Re:RTFA

[Svobodin]

Er... so by extension, it wouldn't be surprising at all if CENTCOM conducted VTCs with the Pentagon. It's only natural. Being that they did it for the past 18 years using conference calls on those crappy old STU-III phones, most of the brass are probably happy with VTC -- or maybe they aren't. Rumsfeld can't watch you sweat on the telephone.

Re:RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

"anywhere near as smart as the average American GI"

Ahahah. HAHAHAHAHA. *collapses*

Re:RTFA

[sql*kitten]

And what happens when an Iraqi captures one of these Sipper sets? He can listen in to Rumsfeld and Bush? Encryption should be between the two endpoints, IMO, like IPSec.

I'm sure that the Pentagon, with access to expert advice from the NSA, CIA, ARPA, MIT etc etc didn't think of that.

Re:RTFA

[dbrutus]

I'm reasonably sure that Microsoft would be willing to set up a local replica of their online help facilities for a secure military network for the right $$$. I would suspect that the military would want its helpdesk to continue to function in the event that Microsoft help gets shut down via a DDOS attack.

Re:RTFA

[Bob Uhl]

It's called a `gap.' It's a way of allowing mediated access to a public resource from a private segment. Essentially, the tech has two workstations: one on the private internet and one on the public Internet. He takes requests from the private side, researches them on the public side, and then returns the results.

Note that this doesn't protect against an evil mediator--other procedures must guard against that.

A/S/ OMFG INCOMIIIINNG!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

This is ridiculous!

IIRC Microsoft chat (the 1st one that came along with Win95) had all those avatar things, I wonder which one use the solders? I just can't imagine a soldier chatting and dl'ing mp3s while on ground combat.

Re:A/S/ OMFG INCOMIIIINNG!!!

[caluml]

"What's funny about using Microsoft Chat," he adds with a sly smile, "is that everybody has to choosean icon to represent themselves. Some of these guys haven't bothered, so the program assigns them one. We'll be in the middle of a battle and a bunch of field artillery colonels will come online in the form of these big-breasted blondes. We've got a few space aliens, too."

Chat rooms?

[pla]

Umm...

I've used the internet, both recreationally and for research, since before people lost the ability to tell the difference between "the web" and "the 'net".

In that time, I have discovered one very persistant trend relevant to attempting to gather meaningfully-true information on-line:

Don't visit chat rooms unless you want to pick up transgendered males.

I don't mean this as a troll (though somewhat tongue-in-cheek), but seriously, asking for military advice on IRC or AOL strikes me as akin to asking the NIDA for information on the dangers of marijuana - ie, even if you manage to get any factual information, you'll never find it from the BS it comes buried under.


This idea concerns me greatly. From the comfort of my fuzzy computer chair, I have the luxury of taking the time to try to separate facts from garbage. Someone asking "what does sarin smell like" will most like die before they even get past the obligatory flood of "A/S/L" requests.

Re:Chat rooms?

[Anonymous Coward]

How fucking stupid are you? Really! How fucking STUPID are you?

Re:Chat rooms?

[Lazyhound]

You, um, realize they're using a closed network to communicate with other military personnel, right? Right.

Re:Chat rooms?

[DeltaSigma]

Sure, I suppose. Are we talking IRC, or AOL though?

I mean, go to debian's IRC server, idle in the debian chat for an hour so everyone who could have possibly cared that you joined has now forgotten, then ask some linux question.

And despite the current debate, fanboy-raving, intellectual discussion, or A/S/L exchange (okay I haven't seen that there), you'll get an immediate and helpful answer, or a request for clarification.

As a linux newbie I've come to rely heavily on the helpful people in the debian IRC channel. Hell, half the reason I haven't even tried another distribution is because I've never experienced technical support of such calibur.

It's strange to hear that, and believe me it's strange to say it, that an IRC channel could be your best tech support experience ever, but it's true.

pla, the best advice I can give to you is to go out and search for good room/channel/group. "Normal" human beings might be outnumbered by the A/S/L transgendered males (so to speak), but there's bound to be a gathering of your liking out there somewhere.

Re:Chat rooms?

[!splut]

The military has a policy about this already:

Don't ask, don't tell

Re:Chat rooms?

[John Jorsett]

I don't mean this as a troll (though somewhat tongue-in-cheek), but seriously, asking for military advice on IRC or AOL strikes me as akin to asking the NIDA for information on the dangers of marijuana - ie, even if you manage to get any factual information, you'll never find it from the BS it comes buried under.

You don't seriously believe that a tank commander is going to go on some AOL or IRC chat and start asking a bunch of random schmucks for advice about a gas attack do you? The military is using off-the-shelf technology to construct their own private networks and chats because that's a convenient structure for what they're trying to accomplish. I work with these guys and they're not quite that stupid (they just might even say the same about me if I'm lucky).

Re:Chat rooms?

[neillt]

Again, people need to RTFA. These chat rooms are NOT on AOL, MSN, undernet, or god knows what else. They are on secure systems that are NOT connected to the internet, and the people that are in them ARE people who can give advice.

Trust me, as f**ked up as the military is, giving away free intelligence to the enemy and creating unsecure systems are issues we are extremely paranoid about. All of these systems are ran thru very good, very classified encryption devices.

I always hate it when a SIPRNET/GCCS/JMCIS/NTDS/whatever story shows up because people love to flood /. with assumptions about how things are really running when they don't have a clue. Don't let your faith in military communications technology instantly evaporate because an end user is talking about "Microsoft Chat". Instead read the article! In it right there, they are talking about "rows of Sun Servers"... hmmmm, last time I checked, Windows did not run on UltraSparcs. Almost ALL tactical systems used by the military (At least USN and USMC, where my experience lays) are UNIX based.

Re:Chat rooms?

[two_socks]

RTFA

Re:Chat rooms?

[rpeppe]

My brother was in the gulf as principal warfare officer on board a british naval vessel. I found his emails fascinating. Here's an extract:

The 6 hours on 6 hours off routine is quite punishing but I am getting into the way of it. Getting up is the big problem, as I rarely get more than 4 hours at a stretch but I am surviving. Meals tend to be eaten at high speed and I have hardly been outside. I have major problems remembering whether it is morning or evening! The 'PWOing' is unlike anything I have done before. We communicate with other ships almost exclusively by chat room on a coalition wide network. It is most odd to spend 6 hours conducting operations with other ships and not to hear a voice from them at all, just to pass messages on chat. It can get rather frantic at times with 2 or 3 'net meetings' in progress, each with up to a dozen people in it and a similar number of private chats at the same time. When any of them receives a new message it jumps to be the top window and flashes at you. It requires rapid typing and good skills with the mouse to shuffle them all around and make sure that they don't obscure each other all the time. I guess it is the future of warfare, and it is very good for some things but there are occasions when you just want to talk - but the Americans don't do that anymore!

What the army needs a few good admins...

[EdgeShadow]

From text of article:

"If a general has a problem with his Web browser, then I fix it," Cluff says.

"How do you fix it?" I ask.

"I consult Microsoft online help," he replies.

Re:What the army needs a few good admins...

[mrpuffypants]

Now every soldier comes with a TechNet subscription for battlefield support.

moron raising the bar for -1 trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

despite indiscriminate abuse buy va lairIE's pateNTdead PostBlock(tm) devise.

now that's funnIE.

lookout bullow. the daze of payper liesense stock markup FraUDs is dissolving into coolapps.

'war' of the wwwords, comin' up. stay tuned. consult with yOUR creator early & often.

In Soviet Russia...

[Anonymous Coward]

Lunches cook YOU on the servers!

Re:In Soviet Russia...

[loucura!]

WRONG! In Soviet Russia, lunches cook servers on YOU!

Better watch that EULA!

[phillymjs]

So what happens if a bunch of soldiers in the field die due to a failure of/flaw in a Microsoft product? Will Microsoft get off scot-free because of their "no liability" language in their EULA? Would there suddenly be knee-jerk laws passed concerning software reliability?

Discuss.

~Philly

Re:Better watch that EULA!

[Anonymous Coward]

Depends on the press coverage. If they managed to cover it up, nothing would probably happen to Microsoft. But if it got reported by CNN (or more likely a foreign news agency), public outrage would probably force the goverment to do something.

Re:Better watch that EULA!

[SpaceCadetTrav]

Would you prefer it if soldiers died due to a flaw in Linux? Maybe they could post a message to a support board from the battlefield.

Re:Better watch that EULA!

[Anonymous Coward]

If they managed to cover it up

"They" meaning the military and/or government, I mean. Because the government would be mighty embarassed if some buffer overflow happening at an inopportune moment in NT 4.0 (yes, the military still uses it, RTFA) got soldiers killed-- it's embarassing enough for them already that the body count from equipment failures in Iraq is giving the combat body count a run for its money.

Re:Better watch that EULA!

[dbrutus]

Actually I view the combat casualty = accident casualty rates as a real positive since it's achieved by driving the combat casualty rate through the floor.

In some ways it's like the cancer 'explosion' myth. We have a cancer explosion because all the other things that killed people earlier have been cured so cancers get a chance to show up. When cancer is cured, something else will take its place as leading killer.

125 degrees

[neves]

Wow! 125 degrees celsius is really a lot.

Re:125 degrees

[WIAKywbfatw]

They're talking Farenheit, not Celcius.

125 degrees Celcius is above the boiling point of water. To find that kind of temperature on the surface of the Earth you'd have to be standing on an active volcano.

Didn't the fact that prolonged exposure to 125 C would be enough to kill anyone (even military grade geeks) give it away?

Re:125 degrees

[Guppy06]

The US military is supposed to be all SI, so they must be talking Kelvin.

Cell phone with 3 megapixel camera

[Anonymous Coward]

Slashdot will post this story in next couple of days. You got heads up (so don't mod down):

Cell phone with 3 megapixel camera

Quote of the week

[caluml]

"How do you fix it?" I ask.
"I consult Microsoft online help," he replies.

That's too funny, really it is. On so many levels.

Article canot distingush Internet from WAN

[whoever57]

If you actually *read* the article, you will see that the reporter talks about (sigh) a "secret Internet" and a "Tactical Internet". What they really mean is a "WAN" (the reporter refers to it as a "far-flung LAN"). It even says that the WAN is NOT connected to the Internet.

Re:Article canot distingush Internet from WAN

[bagsc]

I've heard enough about SIPRNET and what it is or isnt. It is not connected to the Internet proper. It does contain hundreds of thousands of computers, have "www" urls and DNSs and lots of search engines, web crawlers, etc. While some would classically define this as a WAN, I think that it resembles a seperate Internet more, and there is as much content on the red net today as there was on the Internet in the mid nineties.

And we are talking about Joes here - these are the kind of people that wonder why the damn computer adds "http://" to every website they type in, and where the IT and Signal departments refer to data transfers as "receiving electrons" when they are clearly receiving photons. If the name sticks, let them call it an Internet.

Re:Article canot distingush Internet from WAN

[redhog]

_An_ internet (as opposed to _The_ Internet, which is _a_ worldwide internet), is a network of networks, an inter-network-connectivity. WAN is a specific set of technologies for implementing larger networks, whereas an internet is a network made up of several LANs and/or WANs, interconnected using "routers", using the IP as communication protocol.

Jacked up

[L7_]

IIRC, Those 11 POWs that were captured during the middle of the war (pre-bagdad) were captured because thier convoy was lost in the desert. Now reading that article, it comes as no surprise that they were captured and killed.

I'm surprised there weren't more convoys captured because they were lost and then given orders to drive into enemy territory as the way back or someother nonsense scenario where the common soldier does not have the correct equipemt to survive.

That kind of breakdown in communication should not even be a factor when it comes to human lives.

Re:Jacked up

[Anonymous Coward]

Comm breakdowns will always happen, and our losses were trivial and well below reasonable expectations.

It's true

[John Jorsett]

General speaking, you don't encrypt at the software level, you encrypt the comm links themselves, using NSA-approved hardware. That way, you don't have to worry about it at the application level, and there's no opportunity to build in hidden channels to bypass the encryption.

Re:It's true

[caluml]

There's no point encrypting the links if one end is compromised, or am I missing something?

Re:It's true

[John Jorsett]

There's no point encrypting the links if one end is compromised, or am I missing something?

Correct. Which is why you have a destruction plan in the event of capture, and procedures to change out the keys if compromise is suspected. Too, you take into account the perishability of the info. You don't need to protect, "I'm at position X," as long as you do, "the identities of our agents are ...," so that factors in to how you handle potential compromises as well.

Re:It's true

[caluml]

a destruction plan in the event of capture

Like that Enigma machine on that submarine. They didn't ever expect that to fall into Allied hands.

Re:It's true

[Svobodin]

Exactly. A large percentage of the traffic on the tactical internet takes place via tcp/ip on encrypted, frequency hopping fm packet radios. And commo is always ready to push out new comsec in case of any compromise. This keeps them pretty secure. Trying to use any of it outside line-of-sight is a bitch, though.

Re:It's true

[Klaruz]

Military crypto destruction plan: An axe.

Remember when that plane went down in north korea? I remember people saying they were worried they would steal our tech/codes/etc. The thing is, as soon as they realized they'd have to land, that equipment was toast. A few million worth of equipment is nothing compared to the cost of the tech/codes/etc. /ex AF comm/crypto/computer guy.

Re:It's true

[Dylan Zimmerman]

Actually, they DID have contingencies. If the sub was ever boarded, abandoned, or could possibly change hands in any way, the comm oficers were ordered to throw the books describing the Enigma into the water on the floor. These books were printed with a special red ink on pink paper. The ink would disolve as soon as it hit the water.

Without those books, the Enigma would be completely useless. They contained the schedule describing the first few letters the operators had to type to use the machine for any given day. It was a great system, really. The Enigma was eventually captured, but it took quite some doing.

Re:It's true

[scotartt]

i served on a ship in missile fire control radar. on the wall in the section where i worked there was a notice, which described in the event of imminent capture or scuttle, the order of components to destroy in decending order of preference (starting with frequency generating cyrstals and tubes), and what to use. which started with explosives, down through firearms, onto axes and sledgehammers, and even the maintenance tools if nothing else was available.

Re:It's true

[Pieroxy]

Whether your connection to the internet is secure or not, your MSN chat goes to redmond and when they decide to shut down the service for maintenance, you can't communicate even in your "very private" connection.

Unless it is some dedicated software made by MS...

Re:It's true

[Rolo Tomasi]

The point is not that the Germans had no contingency plans; the point is that an Enigma w/ books was captured despite the contingency plans.

Re:It's true

[Ozymandias_KoK]

The issue was not the capture, since they could change the codes for that. The issue was that the machine(s) got captured and the Germans didn't know, thus were not able to execute that continency plan. There's always a way to fail, so what's your point? :)

Re:It's true

[InternalWave]

I've used paper crypto in the Canadian militia, and electronic crypto in the US Marines, and I agree - what really matters is the tactical importance of the information in the event of suspected compromise. In other words, how long is it valid?

Some intelligence gathering means are less robust. You don't want an adversary knowing the resolution of your intel satellites - you particularly don't want them picking up the transmitted signals.

I recall instances in GW1 when we would get facsimiles of beach defense maps drawn by Kuwaitis - I seriously doubt that the agents themselves boated out to the ships to deliver the photos and maps. So I wonder how that info was transmitted? Some brave people any way you look at it...

Heavy Metal music

[Hydraulinen_Androidi]

They also need an MP3 player to torture those poor captured representatives of the former Iraqi regime with heavy metal and children's songs. Very demanding admin work too. Military admin needs to know how to operate Winamp player! No use for M16 as a human rights and democracy tool? Might look a bit nasty on the telly?

And then you might need some kind of a Geiger counter or something to find those non-existent WMD's this war was supposedly about.

And do not forget to buy a pair of robot brains for your smart president.

This is the high tech reality of American Warfare today!

Mr. American President says "Boot my operating system!"

Re:Heavy Metal music

[GuyMannDude]

They also need an MP3 player to torture those poor captured representatives of the former Iraqi regime with heavy metal and children's songs.

You mean like this?

GMD

Re:Heavy Metal music

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean the President who:

"Received a Bachelors Degree from Yale University and an MBA from Harvard Business School. He served as an F-102 pilot for the Texas Air National Guard. He began his career in the oil and gas business in Midland in 1975 and worked in the energy industry until 1986. He was elected Governor on November 8, 1994, with 53.5 percent of the vote. In a historic re-election victory, he became the first Texas Governor to be elected to consecutive four-year terms on November 3, 1998 winning 68.6 percent of the vote. In 1998 Governor Bush won 49 percent of the Hispanic vote, 27 percent of the African-American vote, 27 percent of Democrats and 65 percent of women. He won more Texas counties, 240 of 254, than any modern Republican other than Richard Nixon in 1972 and is the first Republican gubernatorial candidate to win the heavily Hispanic and Democratic border counties of El Paso, Cameron and Hidalgo. (Someone began circulating a false story about his I.Q. being lower than any other President. If you believed it, you might want to go to www.URBANLEGENDS.COM and see the truth."

A simple rule of thumb is. Dumb people don't fly aircraft that like F-102's very long. They die young.

Re:Heavy Metal music

[DoomHaven]

Oh, that's just nice - the rat bastards have turned Kazaa into a repository of Weapons of Mass Destruciton.

Re:Heavy Metal music

[etrnl]

We would have been so lucky....

--etrnl--

Re:Heavy Metal music

[Anonymous Coward]

You really believe that he did much in the military other than getting drunk and hang around? Check this out.

You really think that the guy got degrees from Harvard and Yale because he's so smart and not because he's someone's son?

Think again.

Re:Heavy Metal music

[Anonymous Coward]

They also need an MP3 player to torture those poor captured representatives of the former Iraqi regime with heavy metal and children's songs.

As a member of one of these teams, let me reassure you we do use mp3s, usually on minidisc. And we tend to use MusicMatch on our computers, not WinAmp.

Re:Heavy Metal music

[simgod]

How much do they pay you for posting on /. ? Posting as Anonymous Coward won't earn you your private oil well in Iraq.

How many MS licenses did our military buy?

[kaltkalt]

With our tax dollars, of course. Probably one for each computer. No wonder the war cost over 20 billion dollars. I resent this more than the $300 toilet seats. And they're probably paying $20 a minute for realtime "premier" help from MS, too.

Re:How many MS licenses did our military buy?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well I resnt pinko liberal commies like YOU. Lets call it even.

Re:How many MS licenses did our military buy?

[commodoresloat]

There are more pressing military waste issues than M$ licensing to worry about, like the one trillion missing USD that they simply can't explain. ("Sorry, Senator, I must have left it in my other pants.")

Re:How many MS licenses did our military buy?

[kaltkalt]

It's up in Redmond, WA....

Re:How many MS licenses did our military buy?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude,
How would you like having to explain to Congress how your failure to read the fine print in the MS Advantage 6 Enterprise licensing cost an extra $1,000,000,000,000? Of course its just "missing."

Get real.

[El Camino SS]

For one thing, they appear to be using Microsoft Chat over the internet to communicate reconnaissance information. Whether such communication is secure is something I'd really like the govt. to think about, if not it could be putting soldiers at risk.

You're kidding, right? The DOD created the internet concept to make a more secure network. They have crap to keep things secret that we could only dream of.

Given that one "internet" concept alone, and the fact that Echelon probably exsists and the US Govt has probably been using it for decades, and that military planes explode in impact specifically to destroy technology... ...then I'd juuust assume that the US Govt would be up on communication secrecy.

Cmon. Secrecy has been *the* number one asset of the military for centuries. Its not a new concept.

After all, the Chinese got inside our spyplanes and didn't get jack squat out of it. That should let you know how paranoid we are about our information. So to say, "be careful that is not secure," to the US Military is like saying, "be careful, that stove is hot," to a five star chef.

Re:Get real.

[caluml]

the Chinese got inside our spyplanes and didn't get jack squat out of it.

You're very certain of that.

Re:Get real.

[Anonymous Coward]

After all, the Chinese got inside our spyplanes and didn't get jack squat out of it.

Well, IIRC, they did have some time to destroy/jettison their sensitive gear during the period after the "incident" but before they landed. I would certainly expect they started on the most secret stuff (and probably took more time to really pulverize it) first. Depending on how badly the plane was damaged, the pilot may even have been able to "accidentally" miss a landing approach or two to buy them more destroyin' time.

Re:Get real.

[commodoresloat]

You're kidding, right? The DOD created the internet concept to make a more secure network. They have crap to keep things secret that we could only dream of.

Then they probably should be aware enough not to trust communication to an insecure protocol. In this case the network is only as secure as its weakest application.

Re:Get real.

[Anonymous Coward]

"military planes explode in impact specifically to destroy technology"
No, they don't, but gravity makes a nice mess after which we try to bomb the wreckage.
The hardware isn't easily eploitable. What give us the edge is the ability to build that hardware and integrate it with other systems.
Anthills are robust, even if you have a smashed ant to dissect.

Re:Get real.

[swillden]

So to say, "be careful that is not secure," to the US Military is like saying, "be careful, that stove is hot," to a five star chef.

Hehe. This reminds me of a good story.

A few years ago, I gave a presentation on security technology to the Israeli Ministry of Defense. My presentation went well, but the guy who went before me was a security consultant used to dealing with corporate environments, with absolutely no concept of military realities.

The room full of Israeli brass listened politely to his presentation, even though it was clearly a waste of their time, up until the time he was discussing the importance of documenting your security policies and asked them, in complete seriousness, if the Israeli military commands had any documented security policies. I have to say that they took it very well: rather than forcibly ejecting the idiot from the room, they just laughed uproariously and proceeded to tune out the rest of his talk.

I have more than a passing familiarity with US DOD security policies, which are measured by the metric ton, and I cannot even begin to imagine what Israel, a country that has been, essentially, at war for every minute of its entire existence, must have. Needless to say, when he asked that question, I was torn. Half of me wanted desperately to crawl into a hole and die, and the other half wanted to stand up and yell "He's not from my company! I think he works for Microsoft!"

Re:Get real.

[Dun Malg]

Then they probably should be aware enough not to trust communication to an insecure protocol. In this case the network is only as secure as its weakest application.

GCCS is a CLOSED network using Secret Internet Protocol Routing. The network is only as secure as the weakest application? The applications aren't the ones doing the encrypting, the SIPR layer is. No matter how "weak" MS Chat may be, there's no way to exploit that weakness. The app can't talk to the outside. Even if some nefarious villain could somehow sneak a "back door" or a trojan into the chat client, what could it do? It can't send out info "in the clear" because the network protocol iteself is encrypted; and even if it COULD, to whom would it send this info?

Re:Get real.

[Animats]

You're kidding, right? The DOD created the internet concept to make a more secure network. They have crap to keep things secret that we could only dream of.

They wish. DoD has less in this area than they want and need. They have isolated systems and networks for classified data. They have good crypto. But they also have the same commercial apps everybody else does, with the same problems. In many ways, DoD computer security is much worse than it was twenty years ago.

It's useful to disseminate information widely, even if it risks security. Much classified tactical information has a very short lifetime. If the enemy's intelligence operation isn't good enough to quickly exploit what they can collect, it doesn't matter much if it leaks. Locking everything down ruins coordination. This has been a tradeoff since the first radios made it to the battlefield.

Hence an army using Microsoft Chat.

Fortunately for the US, the Iraqui army wasn't good at collecting and using intel. The Viet Cong and the Afghans were much better.

Re:Get real.

[Atsjoo]

I cannot even begin to imagine what Israel, a country that has been, essentially, at war for every minute of its entire existence...

Yeah. Unlike the US.

Re:Get real.

[dbrutus]

Playing the paranoid for a minute here, imagine intelligence agents who join the US military and attach their technology to our technology, making a gateway into SIPRNet for their hackers to come into.

Frankly, I think that they've got contingencies on that one too but the problem's not as easy as it might look.

Re:Get real.

[dbrutus]

Here's a threat for you.

The PRC projects itself in a long-term confrontation with the US. The idea that it might have agents in our combat forces is not too farfetched. Now imagine in 5-10 years a satellite link can not only be man-portable but can pass inspection and be carried in the field. Mate your US comm gear to the PRC comm gear and you have an opening into SIPRNet that can be exploited.

The PRC doesn't want a direct confrontation with the US though. The downlink is in N. Korea. Heck, it could be in Boise for that matter so long as the PRC can stay clear of the mess. From the downlink it gets routed to the intelligence HQ of the opposing side and all of a sudden they hear what we're saying courtesy of a 3rd party who is closer to technical parity but doesn't want direct confrontation at the moment.

printer friendly page already linked :(

[Mantorp]

now how am I supposed to get that Score:5, Informative?

Entire Article

[Anonymous Coward]

"If We Run Out of Batteries, This War is Screwed."

By Joshua Davis

It's early April, days before the fall of Baghdad, and a convoy of trucks from the 11th Signal Brigade is rolling through southern Iraq. The mission: establish a digital beachhead in central Iraq. Without this advance node and a handful like it, the Army's Third Infantry Division cannot receive the precise targeting information it needs to fight its way into the capital.

About 9 am, soldiers in the convoy see something that fills them with dread: four dead sheep by the side of the dusty road. Within a mile, they spot two more and quickly pull the convoy to a halt. What many had feared since arriving in the Middle East now looks to be a reality: chemical attack. The convoy leader does two things, one in keeping with well-established military protocol and one entirely new. First, he makes a lot of noise. He lets out three long blasts on the horn - the low tech signal for a chemical attack. Then, after donning his own protective gear, he turns to a computer terminal bolted to the dash of his vehicle.

Suspect chemical attack, he types into a Microsoft Chat session running on the tactical Internet, the military's battlefield communications system.

Multiple dead sheep by side of road. Pls advise.

Two hundred miles away - in a warehouse at Forward Command - Lieutenant Colonel Norman Mims, the intelligence officer for the 11th, sees this curious message appear in the chat room and replies, How many sheep over how much distance?

6 sheep. Approx. 1 mile.

A veteran of Desert Storm, Mims has learned that sheep in the region regularly die and are simply dragged to the side of the road. The number and distance are typical.

Unless air quality is degraded, chemical attack unlikely.

If this had been Gulf War I, the convoy would have lost a full day - calling in the incident by radio, describing it to three or four rungs up the command ladder, and waiting for a crew of specialists to arrive, test the air, and give the all-clear. But this war is different. An email gives the sheep's coordinates to a chemical investigation team, and the convoy just keeps moving.

The history of warfare is marked by periodic leaps in technology - the triumph of the longbow at Crécy, in 1346; the first decisive use of air power, in World War I; the terrifying destructiveness of nuclear weapons at Hiroshima, in 1945. And now this: a dazzling array of technology that signals the arrival of digital warfare. What we saw in Gulf War II was a new age of fighting that combined precision weapons, unprecedented surveillance of the enemy, agile ground forces, and - above all - a real-time communications network that kept the far-flung operation connected minute by minute.

Welcome to the so-called revolution in military affairs, the new theory of war that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has been promoting since he arrived at the Pentagon in 2001. Generals at Central Command, in Qatar, put the concept into practice as they sent troops racing toward Baghdad, hopscotching across Iraq, and sidestepping enemy assaults. If rear units were attacked, if supply lines were threatened - so the theory went - the technology would allow soldiers to spot the problem quickly enough to dispatch defenders, who would swarm to the rescue. Information would take the place of a massive troop presence on the ground. Dead sheep could be safely ignored. In short, the war was a grand test of the netcentric strategy in development since the first Gulf War.

At least, that's the triumphal view from the Pentagon briefing room. But what was it like on the ground? As Wired's war correspondent, I tracked the network from the generals' plasma screens at Central Command to the forward nodes on the battlefields in Iraq. What I discovered was something entirely different from the shiny picture of techno-supremacy touted by the proponents of the Rumsfeld doctrine. I found an unsung corps of geeks improvising as they went, cobbling

Earthweb

[ansible]

Particularly intriguing is the use of chat rooms to engage experts thousands of miles away in helping to solve problems at the troop level in the field.

Sounds like something straight out of Earthweb by Marc Stiegler. Except in the book they were fighting this strange interstellar planetoid bent on Earth's destruction.

The book also reminded me of Max Headroom, where that newsroom director "ran" Edison Carter when he was doing those live-on-the-scene reports.

The stuff you saw with Tank and his brother-in-law in the Matrix had many earlier precedents, young jedi.

forget teh weather.

[Brigadier]

Try maintaining a satilite uplink while there is a sand storm going on and your com base is somewhere in norfolk virginia, and 500 miles out to sea. Not only that try following network cabling from a bunker to satilite uplink stations.

I still can't get over them refering them as chat rooms. Shouldnt' it be Armed Forces Comm Relay Applettes or something. Chat rooms seem so yesterday

Re:forget teh weather.

[robi2106]

Well the armed forces never were all that worried about trendiness of their lingo.

robi

Change in communication and detractors

[Wyatt Earp]

There has been alot of press made about the US military's changes in the way it communicates and it's desire to "swarm" on an enemy instead of the old way it and every other army has moved and communicated.

Basicly since the Romans every conventional army moved like a great set of parallel lines with interconnecting lines between them for communication and supply.

There has been a layer of abstraction between what the Generals tell the Colonels, what the Colonels tell the Captains, what the Captains tell the Lieutenants and what the Lieutenants tell thier soldiers.

Since the Revolution the layers of abstraction grew wider and wider.

By the Second World War, the United States Army had the widest gulf between the commanders and the men at the front of any Army in the European Theatre of Operation.

By Vietnam it was worse and the Gulf War it came to a head when Schwarzkopf canned a General who refused to advance due to a lack of fuel for his M-1s.

Now what is happening is remarkably fast adaptation of technology and communications systems for an Army.

In Afghanistan it was possible for A-Teams on the ground to contact the Pentagon directly and request supplies for themselves or thier allies on the ground and to have those things loaded within hours on C-17s.

Beyond the chat-rooms and GPS are the data-links between aircraft like the newer F-15s, F-22s, Grippens, Comanche, or data-links between ships, helicopters and patrol aircraft.

An example of this can be seen in the F-22. The radar of the F-22 has many modes, but one of them is to sit there dark and listen for radar signals, then it sends out pencil thin beams to detect the engines of an aircraft and it compiles a list of possible types from that signature. Using a data-link the detecting F-22 can send back detailed target information and aircraft behind the lead aircraft can launch AIM-120 missiles on a profile to light thier radars only when they get close to the target.

People have been pooh-pooing this revolution in communication and sensors in the press, but I think there is an assumption of rapid technology adpotion in the private sector that just doesn't happen in the military, but as militaries go the United States is adopting at a revolutionary rate.

Re:Change in communication and detractors

[GuyMannDude]

People have been pooh-pooing this revolution in communication and sensors in the press, but I think there is an assumption of rapid technology adpotion in the private sector that just doesn't happen in the military, but as militaries go the United States is adopting at a revolutionary rate.

Maybe I'm not reading the same press that you are but I haven't seen anything that would be described as pooh-pooing. However, what I did see was a lot of retired generals claiming that relying on the new technology was awfully gutsy. I think a lot of people were mortified that Rumsfeld insisted on using the Iraqi war as a testbed for the lighter, more maneuverable force paradigm rather than letting the military planners have the heavy equipment they wanted. There's no doubt that communication technology is playing a larger role in military operations and will continue to do so for the foreseable future. I think people just wanted these concepts tested a bit more before using them in battle.

GMD

Re:Change in communication and detractors

[Wyatt Earp]

I've seen a fair amount of pooh-pooing.

From Noah Shachtman

"Listen to the techno-slobberers, and you'd think the networks that brought unprecedented communication among U.S. troops popped up, fully formed, out of the Mesopotamian sand."

I really like his site, but he pooh-poos the advances going on and the time it takes to develop systems a little much.

For the most part the units used in Iraq were heavy formations with traditional equipment.

Slate wrote "JUNK THE APACHE"

Forget about the fact it was during a sand storm and the first time a new version (D - Longbow) was used in massed formations

Re:Change in communication and detractors

[brer_rabbit]

In Afghanistan it was possible for A-Teams on the ground...

On the ground? Well duh! How many times do we have to hear, "I ain't gettin' on no plane with that crazy fool!"

Re:Change in communication and detractors

[timeOday]

Weird war, wasn't it? I was following websites from Russia, Europe, the US, and the Middle East, and everybody seemed to agree that the war was bogging down and that the administration had misjudged badly. One memorable phrase: "The Rumsfeld doctrine of underwhelming force" (a play on the "Powell doctrine of overwhelming force.") Then the next day we won the war.

Re:Change in communication and detractors

[YrWrstNtmr]

I think people just wanted these concepts tested a bit more before using them in battle.

Ya gotta test it sometime. Non-battlefield testing can only go so far. Red Flag, NTC in California, whatever the Navy equivalent is...can only do so much.

Not until you really set up in the field, and close with the enemy do you know what will happen.

With today's comms, aircraft from 3 different bases (US, England, Diego Garcia), 5-8,000 miles away, can hit a target 10 minutes after an Army unit has left the area. And 5 minutes after the Navy cruise missiles have hit. And all aircraft get within one minute ToT.

Without these comms and nav aids, we'd have to revert to Vietnam or even WWII era tactics. Bombing and communication has become so good, we started using cement shapes to kill tanks, instead of actual explosives.

Re:Change in communication and detractors

[echucker]

Obligatory Rumsfeld/Hannibal quote - "I love it when a plan comes together."

DON'T

[GC]

MENTION THE WAR...

[John Cleese, Faulty Towers]

Re:DON'T

[tcopeland]

"I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it!"

"You started it!"
"We did not!"
"Yes you did, you invaded Poland!"

Classic stuff.

Colonel!!!! Error message!!!!

[macshune]

Private : Colonel! It says, "MSN Messenger down for maintenance. Please try again in 15 minutes"

Colonel : Shit, boy! We're gonna get gassed 'cause Billy didn't change the oil up in Redmond! Sheeeit.

Private : Do you want me to bring out the pigeons?

Colonel [lights cigarette]:Fuck it. Send an e-mail to command that says, "possible chemical attack underway. pls advise."

Private :Sir! XP just had to install an update. I need to reboot! ...Sir? Sir???

[Colonel breaks M-16 over leg]

Thankfully, a giant penguin dropped down from the sky with reliable software, just before it was too late.

Anatomy of failure: What Killed FreeBSD

[Anonymous Coward]

The End of FreeBSD

[ed. note: in the following text, former FreeBSD developer Mike Smith gives his reasons for abandoning FreeBSD]

When I stood for election to the FreeBSD core team nearly two years ago, many of you will recall that it was after a long series of debates during which I maintained that too much organisation, too many rules and too much formality would be a bad thing for the project.

Today, as I read the latest discussions on the future of the FreeBSD project, I see the same problem; a few new faces and many of the old going over the same tired arguments and suggesting variations on the same worthless schemes. Frankly I'm sick of it.

FreeBSD used to be fun. It used to be about doing things the right way. It used to be something that you could sink your teeth into when the mundane chores of programming for a living got you down. It was something cool and exciting; a way to spend your spare time on an endeavour you loved that was at the same time wholesome and worthwhile.

It's not anymore. It's about bylaws and committees and reports and milestones, telling others what to do and doing what you're told. It's about who can rant the longest or shout the loudest or mislead the most people into a bloc in order to legitimise doing what they think is best. Individuals notwithstanding, the project as a whole has lost track of where it's going, and has instead become obsessed with process and mechanics.

So I'm leaving core. I don't want to feel like I should be "doing something" about a project that has lost interest in having something done for it. I don't have the energy to fight what has clearly become a losing battle; I have a life to live and a job to keep, and I won't achieve any of the goals I personally consider worthwhile if I remain obligated to care for the project.

Discussion

I'm sure that I've offended some people already; I'm sure that by the time I'm done here, I'll have offended more. If you feel a need to play to the crowd in your replies rather than make a sincere effort to address the problems I'm discussing here, please do us the courtesy of playing your politics openly.

From a technical perspective, the project faces a set of challenges that significantly outstrips our ability to deliver. Some of the resources that we need to address these challenges are tied up in the fruitless metadiscussions that have raged since we made the mistake of electing officers. Others have left in disgust, or been driven out by the culture of abuse and distraction that has grown up since then. More may well remain available to recruitment, but while the project is busy infighting our chances for successful outreach are sorely diminished.

There's no simple solution to this. For the project to move forward, one or the other of the warring philosophies must win out; either the project returns to its laid-back roots and gets on with the work, or it transforms into a super-organised engineering project and executes a brilliant plan to deliver what, ultimately, we all know we want.

Whatever path is chosen, whatever balance is struck, the choosing and the striking are the important parts. The current indecision and endless conflict are incompatible with any sort of progress.

Trying to dissect the above is far beyond the scope of any parting shot, no matter how distended. All I can really ask of you all is to let go of the minutiae for a moment and take a look at the big picture. What is the ultimate goal here? How can we get there with as little overhead as possible? How would you like to be treated by your fellow travellers?

Shouts

To the Slashdot "BSD is dying" crowd - big deal. Death is part of the cycle; take a look at your soft, pallid bodies and consider that right this very moment, parts of you are dying. See? It's not so bad.

To the bulk of the FreeBSD committerbase and the developer community at large - keep your eyes on the real goals. It'

125 degrees??? Blimey - boiled soliders

[Anonymous Coward]

125 degrees - enough to boil eggs to go with
the solders.

Oh, wait - its posted by a mercan. He must be talking about some units my granny used to use. Jeez - join the 21st century!

Unsung heroes

[Anonymous Coward]

Interesting article from WSJ that talks about these new Warriors.

Hey, fudgepacker

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a ONE megapixel camera. RTFA, cum-sipper.

Re:Colonel!!!! Error message!!!!

[netsharc]

Reminds me of the scene from the South Park movie, where the holographic war map crashes, and the General summons Bill Gates. Here an MP3 of their conversation.

Embedded...

[cruppel]

The news ruined the word "embedded" for me...Embedded reporters watching soldiers fight, take a piss, talk about this war like it had been going on for even two months, watching them do whatever...I will always hear that word from now on and think of soldiers doing mundane things.

As for them using "Microsoft Chat" or whatever they called it, that's just plain irresponsible. If people have trouble using computers for simple email every day then why on God's (sandy) earth do they think those same technologies will hold up in much more mission-critical military conditions?

Re:Embedded...

[djupedal]

I take it you missed the story on the 'embedded' dolphins that were used to survey harbors in Iraq?

Re:Embedded...

[cruppel]

Oh my it looks like I did. Well, that's an interesting idea, but pick a new word dammit! Make one up or something!

Re:Embedded...

[wizard992]

As for them using "Microsoft Chat" or whatever they called it, that's just plain irresponsible. If people have trouble using computers for simple email every day then why on God's (sandy) earth do they think those same technologies will hold up in much more mission-critical military conditions?

Well, first off, your average user doesn't usually have problems with programs like chat because of technical difficulties but because of user error and basically being unable to comprehend what is going on with the program. The training of the military would ensure that every soldier knows how to use those tools before entering combat, just like they know how to use their rifle or airplane.

Second, these applications would be tested and hardened for years before they are deployed in a real time combat scenario, drastically reducing the chances of any kind of technical failure within the program itself. The military is just as aware of problems (ie: someone getting killed because of a system crash) as we all are, and they would ensure that it meets a minimum level of reliability.

Not to mention, a unit in a front line combat situation would have backups; radios, maps, etc, basically all the equipment they had before the new technology came along.

*BSD is dying

[Anonymous Coward]

It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

Fact: *BSD is dying

Piss-off, geek-ass-bitch

[Anonymous Coward]

He's a journalist who doesn't spend twenty hours a day at his computer (unlike you). He probably isn't aware of the term 'WAN' or he would have used it. And his term 'secret Internet' is perfectly descriptive, in that it is a network that works like the Internet, but it's private. That's his perspective anyway, because he's a normal person, not a single-minded computer dork like yourself.

Just because someone doesn't know anything and everything about computers and networks doesn't make them an idiot, it just means that they actually have a life. You oughta give it a try, although it's probably too late.

Re:Piss-off, geek-ass-bitch

[Anonymous Coward]

A journalist who does not research his subject well is a poor journalist. I agree that he doesn't spend 20 hours a day working at a computer for its own sake, but I also doubt he spends 20 hours a day working at journalism either.

SIPRNET definition

[SylvesterTheCat]

"GCCS runs over Siprnet - the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network"

Just how damned difficult is it to get acronyms right?

The correct definition is "Secure Internet Protocol Network," although I have also heard it as "Secure Internet Protocol Router Network"

Apparently, very difficult.

The Internet and The Peace

[Hao Wu]

Go to a chat room right now, and say something nice to somebaody. At random, let's all do this RIGHT NOW.

If you go to average chat room, you find LITTLE wars and hatred. War is OK sometimes, but peace is better.

Why not try and use the 'net for peace technology, if we all go and do this RIGHT NOW!

Spacker. (was Re:Chat rooms?)

[Anonymous Coward]

You, my friend, are a fucking class-A retard.

Re:Colonel!!!! Error message!!!!

[Svobodin]

Most of the important stuff in the theater of operations runs on Solaris, usually.

Clippy sez...

[commodoresloat]

It looks like you're communicating news of a WMD emergency. Would you like help?

__ Get help with emergency

__ Continue with emergency without help

__ Howl in agony and clutch at face as it melts grotesquely into the desert sand

Re:F-22

[Wyatt Earp]

Now I'm sure someone will complain about my talking up the F-22 and claim I'm over Tom Clancy'ing it's capabilities or something.

My info came from International Air Power Review Volume 5 pages 60-62 and covers the ALR-94 passive receiver, Intra-Flight Datalink and APG-77 radar in non-cooperative target recognition and jet engine modulation modes.

critical soldier skills

[The Tyro]

like cleaning everything... constantly... endlessly.

Most people who have never deployed to that region of the world don't realize that it's not sandy... it's dusty. The soil (or what passes for soil) is this lightweight, fine, adherent brown dust... that dust got into damned near everything, even closed pelican cases (don't ask me how).

It wreaked havoc on our COMM and Systems guys; they were constantly cleaning their boxen, from the servers, right on down to the Dell laptops we were using.

Even in my field (medical), we were constantly cleaing and mopping out our Operating Room (in a tent, naturally).. you could NEVER get ahead of the dust. This drove my surgeon colleagues nuts... you could pretty much count on a higher complication rate with an environment like that. When the sandstorms would roll in, forget about it.

A bunch of us ran our own private LAN between a bunch of tents; honing our 31337 CounterStrike 5killz (I tell ya, those terrorists were in deep trouble if they tried to take us on... our M4 and AWP skills would have devastated those Al-Queda noobs... ) Fortunately, our hardware was not as mission-essential as the systems/COMM types... we could afford the occasional crash (though it did hurt to lose your sweet kill ratio).

Demanding environment, alright... it's amazing our stuff worked as well as it did.

It is always peaceful on IRC...

[AnimeFreak]

Everyone just idles and says nothing. Hence, lots of peace. :)

Technology changes other fields as well

[John3]

The challenge is to integrate the technology without reducing the skills that make the particular occupation unique. I own a hardware store and we've embraced all sorts of inventory, POS, web, wireless and communication technology. However, we still need to be able to manually examine a rusted ballcock that a customer yanked out of their toilet and hook them up with the proper replacement parts.

Re:Technology changes other fields as well

[operagost]

Huh huh... you said "ballcock".

Communication Networks

[citadelgrad]

I have a friend that was one of the people running tests again the models of the communication networks that are being used in the Middle East.

War is cool and doesn't cause any harm!

[MavEtJu]

"What's funny about using Microsoft Chat," he adds with a sly smile, "is that everybody has to choosean icon to represent themselves. Some of these guys haven't bothered, so the program assigns them one. We'll be in the middle of a battle and a bunch of field artillery colonels will come online in the form of these big-breasted blondes. We've got a few space aliens, too."

This is exactly what I fear, that going to war is fun and not causing any harm to whoever is in it. First the US television stations didn't want to show the pictures of their own casualties, now this is added.

War is cool, war is fun and it doesn't cause any harm[*]!

[*] no pictures of harmed people by our own actions will be shown.

Re:War is cool and doesn't cause any harm!

[lysander]

"What's funny about using Microsoft Chat," he adds with a sly smile, "is that everybody has to choosean icon to represent themselves. Some of these guys haven't bothered, so the program assigns them one. We'll be in the middle of a battle and a bunch of field artillery colonels will come online in the form of these big-breasted blondes. We've got a few space aliens, too."

This is the exact same software used to run the online comic Jerkcity.

Try reading some. They're great, but they take a little getting used to. And it's absolutely hilarious to imagine to imagine generals being mapped to Spigot, Pants, Deuce, Rands, and the rest of the gang. :)

Re:War is cool and doesn't cause any harm!

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry no time to type up more: (it's about the game Americas Army)

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/techreviews/2002/5/ 22 /army-game.htm

"We know that Americans love this type of electronic entertainment," explains Maj. Chris Chambers of the army's Office of Economic and Manpower Analysis. "It just made sense the army communicates its story where people like to spend time."

"Essentially, America's Army is a communication tool designed to show players what the army is -- a high-tech, exciting organization with lots to do."

"There are no embedded messages. ... This is simply an entertaining and informative tool to connect with America about what the army is about."

"more of a positive marketing tool than a recruitment strategy"

http://www.americasarmy.com/

A thrilling first-person action game. Become a member of the world's premier land force; trained and equipped to achieve decisive victory anywhere. Earn the right to call yourself a Soldier, letting the enemies of freedom know that America's Army has arrived.

Make a difference in the world-and in yourself-as you join thousands online, neutralizing threats wherever they arise. Honor and integrity will forge your character; bravery and firepower will prove your readiness in any situation. Teamwork. Respect. Action. The adventure starts here!

=/

Re:125 degrees(not - metric)

[Anonymous Coward]

yes, Renember mesurements without units are useless. That mars lander fun we had all over again. Pls all for god sakes at least be kind enough to mention units as, as before we(as appearant by the post we still do anyway) will asume they are using the units that are standard localy(damn global economy can get anything so simple... rant rant rant). So renember boys and girls do your math homework converting and save us/US billions so we can buy more bombs.... J/K... I'm Canadain. Actually I am impressed that they sent so many heavily armed 18* year olds into a place and accomplished what they set out to. Back on topic, what I find troubling is that making such blunders is concidered a mistake and not incompetence. We have a course at the University of Alberta for computing Science that goes over types of errors and how to measure error and see when it is significant. I renemper the old bug* that the patriots (missiles) would after being on for a period grow more and more out of sync. This resulted in failed interceptions. Anyhow if there is a related error that was made by someone before then I dont EVER want to hear about it being made again. Take the damn course. One of my favourite Old rule applies in spades- To err is human but to really fuck up requires a computer. Geers are held responsible for errors in thier designs when a (insert structure) colapses. Software coders should also be. I hate it when something shoddy propogates the whole system and the EULA says the programmers arn't responsible for shit. Users suck they fuck up so much good* code to but I believe it requres a understanding of human stupidity to anticipate the responsibility a programmer I believe should take. Legally requireing insurence or liability would at least make companies and people may more attention. Give me a better system that works and I may prefer it. God I love to rant.... GL world Yes democracy is doomed/

There's an image from the article...

[Anonymous Coward]

...it shows a soldier leafing through leafing through a "Windows NT 4.0 Unleashed" -type book. I guess the military decided they weren't going to pay for upgrades either...

Re:There's an image from the article...

[Anonymous Coward]

..but I should pay for a grammar checker...

sad? pathetic? thats the us war machine!

[n3r0.m4dski11z]

Wow. i dont even know what to say about this. the us went in and, with the help of technology, slaughtered(sp?) and carpet bombed a country that didnt even have a standing army. does anyone know how many altercations with millitary units they had? of course this is just glossed over because its slashdot and because the story has to do with computers it doesnt really matter that the computers are being used to kill real people.

this is sick. america acts like it won a very tough battle when really its like mowing down native americans with shotguns and rifles. iraq never had a chance, this isnt a war, its fucking mass murder.

and what the hell does this mean (from article)
A sign posted on a folding picnic table outside the door reads, "the beatings will stop when morale rises." UMMM??

i sware to god america wake the fuck up. go ahead patriots mod me down ive been at -1 for 2 years and dont expect it to change, but what really are you defending, what are you being patriotic about? examine your rational before all this sophisticated hardware is turned inward on you; of course thats what it woudl take to make americans realize anything, that there personal lives are in danger.
first they came for the terrorists but i was not a terrorist....

ohh pleeze

[torved]

Give me a break. Swarm tactics are NOT new to military campaigns. It's called : gorilla warfare. It's called : not being predicatable. Its called : keeping secrets. So much crap written about NEW and wonderful techniques. Oh, I'm sure Rumsfeld's a smart guy and all, but he didn't invent swarm tactics. He didn't invent squat!

Instead of giving credit to all the current Media Hero's, how about some credit to all the hard working engineer's and support people who made this possible.

Re:ohh pleeze

[magarity]

Swarm tactics are NOT new to military campaigns. It's called : gorilla warfare

Gorillas are a fairly peaceful lot; despite occasionally beating their chests in a tough-guy manner. There may be tussles between individuals from time to time over who is the dominant male in a given group but never anything so widespread as actual warfare.

Re:ohh pleeze

[torved]

right guerilla warfare went out with the gorillas...

Using chat rooms to connect soldiers to experts?

[cje]

*** soldier (jimbo@army.iq) has joined channel #help
*** techie (whizkid@pentagon.mil) has joined channel #help
<soldier> hey, anybody know how to get sand out of a gatling gun?
<techie> Sure thing. let me look it up for you. brb
<soldier> thanks
*** katie (luvkitties@ipt.aol.com) has joined channel #help
<katie> hay all!!!!!!!!!!!!!
<soldier> ...
<katie> hi solder ASL??
<techie> Approximately when did you get the sand in the gatling gun?
<katie> huh??
<soldier> about 15 minutes ago.
<techie> okay, brb
<katie> techie what r u talking about!!
*** jenny (nsync_rulz@msn.com) has joined channel #help
<katie> hi jenny how r u ltns!!!!!!! lol
<jenny> K8E!!!! kisskiss
<soldier> ...
<techie> How much sand would you say is inside the gatling gun?
<jenny> wtf lol
<soldier> well, there's quite a bit. it's draining out like an hourglass.
<jenny> hour glass??
<katie> jenny geuss what, taylor told lisa today that he want's me 2 invite him 2 the dance on saturday
<jenny> omfg LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
<jenny> wat did u say? did u say anything 2 him?
<techie> The sand is draining out of the Gatling gun like an hourglass?
<soldier> pretty much, yes.
<katie> heehehe!! well i went up 2 him and said hi and then he bought me a bottle of mt dew code red!! LOL
<techie> I see. have you tried shaking it vigorously?
<katie> techie wtf would i shake it vigorusly, it would fizz over and explode
*** techie rolls eyes
<techie> soldier: Have you tried shaking the gatling gun vigorously?
<soldier> no. brb
*** taylor (linkinparkfan@earthlink.net) has joined channel #help
<jenny> OMFG
<katie> OMFG
<soldier> OMFG
<soldier> the damn thing just went off and took out the cook and the chaplain
<katie> hi taylor, how r u????
<techie> I see. Recommend you replace gatling gun immediately.
<taylor> hi katie
<soldier> roger
*** soldier has left channel #help
<taylor> jenny, how r u? r u busy saturday night?
<katie> f u jenny
*** katie has left channel #help

Anyone else wondering.....

[telstar]

Where's Junis when we need him?

Public Information Too!

[Slur]

If not for the Internet most Americans would never have heard that much of the intelligence information Colin Powell presented to the U.N. was based on outdated, and plagiarized material. The U.S. press simply didn't report it. So among other things, in wartime the Internet is going to continue to be very important for getting reliable information beyond state propaganda.

Of course if the United States' press didn't have their noses stuck up the ass of the government and the corporate establishment they might learn how to ask probing and difficult questions, and we wouldn't have to go looking for truthful reporting and real analysis from outside sources.

I am a nigger, you insensitive clod!

[Anonymous Coward]

fucking japanazi scumbag!

It's funny...

[8-balll]

that the reporter has no clue or didn't really care what he was looking at. GCCS is actually a great system, to bad it's run on unix!! They've finally ported it to windoze(as a client)...but it's only as good as the input from humans. Plus not everyone using the system are fully trained in how to support it, most don't know how to completely use it. I won't even get into explaining the SIPERnet!!

Want to see how the internet REALLY changes war?

[Vegan Pagan]

Read what an Iraqi has to say about it.

Good question...

[Goonie]

But seriously, does that extend to allied forces, cos we (British) always seem to take a lot of hits from people allegedly on the same side as us. :o(

I don't know about this specific system, but the Australian government reckons that one of the reasons it's going to have to spend a crapload more money on defence is so that our systems can remain compatible with the US's systems.

Break Time

[rc5-ray]

So, what LAN games do you suppose they play when there's a lull in the war?

America's Army? uh, um, never mind.

Re:F-22

[PD]

Here ya go

Don't Laugh. It's True.

[Anonymous Coward]

They also need an MP3 player to torture those poor captured representatives of the former Iraqi regime with heavy metal and children's songs. Very demanding admin work too. Military admin needs to know how to operate Winamp player! No use for M16 as a human rights and democracy tool? Might look a bit nasty on the telly?

Yes, it's true that they're doing this. Check this out.

Obligatory war + internet quote

[tanveer1979]

"The biggest achievement of the internet is that it reduces a nuclear war to nothing more than a series of routing errors"
--Anon

What war?

[tangent3]

I haven't heard of a war for quite a while.
Oh, you mean the war against SARS?

we are the borg

[technoCon]

resistance is futile.

this kinda realtime adaptation to battlefield problems is one step in the borgish direction. the more that i see of our growing ability to collaborate the more it seems like the borg, but the less it bothers me. maybe not all group-minds are created equal.

bottom line is how our assimilation of Iraq turns out. if we're conquerors, that's one thing. if we're liberators, that's another thing.

Ban Barney...

[Goonie]

Seeing Barney the Dinosaur is being used for psychological torture of Iraqis, does this mean that we can start an international campaign to ban Barney?

Please Mod Parent Up

[HidingMyName]

The Parent gives some nice technical details.

Question!

[Anonymous Coward]

Where exactly were you deployed because I believe your post is pretty much bullshit.

Re:Colonel!!!! Error message!!!!

[DNS-and-BIND]

No surprise, there.

Re:Using chat rooms to connect soldiers to experts

[Anonymous Coward]

Whoa. Very well done, and very funny. Thanks =)

If you actually want to do this...

[Dthoma]

...just make up a mix CD of the following songs:

• Barney the Dinosaur theme song
• Bananaman theme song
• Minimum Wage (They Might Be Giants)
• Harvey The Wonder Hamster (Weird Al)
• Countdown theme song
• Takin' Retards To The Zoo (Dead Milkmen)
• Working Class Hero (John Lennon)
• I Wupped Batman's Ass (Wesley Willis)
• Toddler Hiway (They Might Be Giants)

Duct tape your victim to a chair, pick one of the songs at random and play it over...and over...and over...

Quoth the machine.

[nounderscores]

Your flesh is a rug on your vessle. Hand over your flesh, We demand it.

Technology Over News

[Anonymous Coward]

While this new link is very interesting,
it is typical of most coverage of the war:
The actual blood and guts cost is left out,
the "Hey gee whiz" technological side is
emphasized, along with hearty shots of
celebrating Iraqis.

That being said, I am somewhat surprised they use microsoft chat. Not because I hate MS, but I would have assumed they would write their own
chat program, to more efficiently use what computer resources they have, and to have complete control over the stability and function of the program.

On the telephone no-one can hear you sweat

[nounderscores]

"My lord, we have come out of lightspeed and..."

"You have failed me for the last time, Admiral. Captain Piett, You are in Command."

Bah, I wasy... BAH!

[clambake]

The military better watch itself -- if they start relying too heavily on technology, soldiers will lose the fundamental skills that make them unique.

I hear this a lot, but it's never valid. Much in the same way that 99.999999% of the population in the world today has lost the ability to flake proper flint knives for use in spear hunting the buffalo, so too will the military lose it's ability to fight bloody ugly wars with thier bare fists. Reliance on technology is what humans are meant to do... and should that technology fail? Well then the answer is more, berrter, faster technology!

Well things like that are usually not a problem

[Sycraft-fu]

Sufficiently new technology tends to be so overpowering that old technology stands no chance. Take for example swords and modren armour. Kevlar/Goldflex armour is poor protection against pointed weapons like swords or ice picks. It may stop bullets well, but without some supplement, it will not stop a sword thrust. No problem, armed with a gun and with the superior mobility of the lighter armour, a person with a sword and suit of platemail is no problem. A .223 will punch right through said plate mail and doo it at 200 yards away, where a sword is not a problem.

Re:Well things like that are usually not a problem

[Dun Malg]

Kevlar/Goldflex armour is poor protection against pointed weapons like swords or ice picks.

I wouldn't call it poor protection vs. swords. You'd have to have a very thin sword, very smooth, and thrust it pretty hard to get through the standard-issue Kevlar vest. I watched a couple supply guys in the army "de-milling" a kevlar vest by bayonet-thrust. They couldn't get the M9 bayonet to go through more than a half inch. They did get an M7 to stick into the tree the vest was wrapped around, but it took them five or six tries. But an ice pick, yeah, that'll probably go right through.

Re:Well things like that are usually not a problem

[Bob Uhl]

But an ice pick, yeah, that'll probably go right through.

Sounds like, IIRC, a poniard. That was a mediaeval dagger designed to punch through armour--a man can slam one through a garbage dumpster. Anyway, seems to me that that might be a useful thing to have on one's person, should one be fighting Kevlar-armoured men.

Re: Your sig is a misquote

[alba7]

http://www.borg.com/~paperina/fallaci/fallaci_9.ht ml.

Ennio Flaiano: "In Italy there are two categories of fascists: the fascists and the antifascists".

Re: Your sig is a misquote

[sql*kitten]

Ennio Flaiano: "In Italy there are two categories of fascists: the fascists and the antifascists".

Maybe it's a translation artifact; I took the quote directly from my English copy of "The Rage and The Pride" by Fallaci. Tha article you linked to appears to be the original newspaper article, but the book is the "full version" of what she meant to say but couldn't fit in.

Blue Screen of Death

[Cackmobile]

I can't believe they use Microsoft. Imagine getting the system crashing in the middle of a war. That really would be the Blue Screen of Death!!!

Compaq?

[westyvw]

"The thick front wall swings open, revealing two rows of Compaq servers." And my compaq dies when ever I look at it sternly. Seriously, why did they choose those?

Re:Compaq?

[Anonymous Coward]

I take it you're not an IT person. Compaq servers are some of the best in the business, but one wouldn't know it from the low end consumer desktops they crank out.

I have Presario nightmares daily!

Re:Using chat rooms to connect soldiers to experts

[modme2]

it was a good laugh :)

That's hot

[Exxxodus]

125 degrees Celcius is kind of hot. It's not an easy job.

Nice try, monkeyboy

[The Tyro]

You think my post is bullshit? I really don't care what a 14yo AC who hasn't the stones to post under his real account thinks. Besides, unless you've got security clearance and NTK, I can't tell you.

Sorry, but I take the national security agreement I signed very seriously.

Re:Nice try, monkeyboy

[Dun Malg]

You think my post is bullshit? I really don't care what a 14yo AC who hasn't the stones to post under his real account thinks. Besides, unless you've got security clearance and NTK, I can't tell you.

Doncha' just love guys like that? Same guys who don't believe you when you tell 'em we had to import sand to fill the sand bags.

You know what bugged me the most about the "sand" there? The grit between my teeth. Wash it out... it comes back... wash again... back again... repeat until you go insane...

error code "All military systems are infected"?

[nounderscores]

What the hell is going on?

Heating with electronics

[Anonymous Coward]

I used to use an old shortwave radio for just that sort of thing...

Truer than you know

[Phoenix666]

A buddy of mine was a lieutenant in charge of logistics for the 101st airborne based in Kentucky. He said on their training maneuvers they were expected to use what he called "War for Windows" to route supplies to battalions in the field and things commonly wound up on the exact opposite part of the map from where they were supposed to arrive. He said the temptation to inform his superior officers that they had been forced to reboot the system with an M-16 was overwhelming.

You know

[John Penix]

Wipe out the four major NOCs in North America, and the much-vaunted Internet redundancy dies on the pointy end of traceroute.

Former military member

[Ex-MislTech]

Multiple lines of communication are established .

Standard Radio, and Encrypted if need be .

Sat Comm, now computers via the internet .

cutting communications lines is an old tactic,
it is anticipated, thus the needs for multiple
lines of Comm .

And believe it or not a Secret means I cannot
mention that is so far fetched, alot of ppl
would not even believe it , thanks to the Navy .

Peace
Ex-MislTech

Yeah Ok

[Anonymous Coward]

I need a security clearance to know where you and your "buddies" were playing Counter-Strike on military computers. I can't believe your parent was modded up. Did the moderators actually read this stuff?!?

A bunch of us ran our own private LAN between a bunch of tents; honing our 31337 CounterStrike 5killz (I tell ya, those terrorists were in deep trouble if they tried to take us on... our M4 and AWP skills would have devastated those Al-Queda noobs... ) Fortunately, our hardware was not as mission-essential as the systems/COMM types... we could afford the occasional crash (though it did hurt to lose your sweet kill ratio).

Give me a break. I've read your previous posts before I declared your parent bullshit. You're a karma whore and it bothers me because there are real soldiers overseas today working with military technology that aren't playing Counter-Strike on them.

A) Which active duty military personnel calls Al-Queda "noobs"? You must be nineteen years old.

B) But, you can't be that young to be in the "medical field".

C) Surgeons in the military are all medical school graduates with two years experience. Minimum age is 27/28. Please don't tell me you're 27 and still using 31337 and "5killz" and "noobs".

D) Which MOS are you calling the "systems/COMMs" guys? Why not just say Signal Corps?

E) What MOS are you in the "medical field"?!?

At best, you're a contractor, but please don't put down the real work of miltary service personnel serving overseas with your bullshit stories. And, using acronyms like "need to know" doesn't impress me.

Yet again, nice try.

[The Tyro]

Sorry, kid... but you've got a lot to learn.

I'm not here to indulge your adolescent military fantasies. Normally I'd tell you to go live vicariously through somebody else, but you're persistent, which I admire, so I'll bite.

First, I'll correct your misconceptions about military medicine. Most surgeons in the miltary are trained in civilian residencies, except for the output of the handful of military residencies (2-3 per service branch). That's undergrad, medical school, and FIVE years of residency. Many programs require a year of research, and end up being SIX years... minimum age 32+. Note that I'm not talking about GMO's (battalion surgeons and "flight surgeons," neither of which are actual surgeons)... who go to the field with ONE year of experience.

You betrayed your age by responding to my tongue-in-cheek CounterStrike comment... I'm glad my attempt to throw readers your age a bone wasn't totally lost on you... though it's too bad you missed the joke. Surprised to find that adults play video games? Shocked that it's not just you and your teenage friends? I've been a gamer my entire life; I was a Pac-Man/Donkey Kong/Galaxians/Gorf master before you were even born. Also, reread my post; we ran our game net on OUR OWN hardware. Misuse of Govt. Systems is a crime, particularly in a combat zone... and none of us were keen on getting that career-ending article 15.

Also, there's NO WAY I can give you ANY information about where I was deployed; I can't even tell you why, since it would amount to the same thing. Sorry, but that's just the way that particular group wanted it (if you're in the military yourself, you'll realize what I'm saying here). So yes, you DO need a security clearance to know where I was... sorry.

"Put down the real work of military personnel serving overseas?" Please... when not working, we played video games to amuse ourselves. We were in an extremely austere location, where the local sensibilities would NOT have meshed with our normal american idea of off-duty entertainment. Hence, fragging one another for hours on end in our tents was better than the alternatives. Local justice in some of those countries is pretty damned harsh, so we behaved, and amused ourselves in other ways. Deploy sometime... you'll learn to improvise, just as we did.

Finally, I've got to stand up for the contractors here... I dearly hope you were not disparaging them. I loved those guys... they freed us up to do other jobs, and kept us supplied with ordinance, food, and other materials we needed... even kept our equipment serviced... They were great, and their knowledge of local politics was a godsend. They exposed themselves to substantial risk, and they were a big help to us, so no potshots at the contractors, got it? They were there, right alongside the rest of us.