Slashdot Mirror
The Soldier is the Network
Roland Piquepaille writes "This article from InfoWorld says that "in the battle of the future, the helmet becomes a data retrieval device." It describes a scenario where soldiers are equipped with sensors and other networking equipment. "Each person is a network with routing capability to everyone else," says Peter Marcotullio, director of development at SRI International. This technology should be available in five years for the military, which probably means that we'll become networks ourselves ten years from now. Check this column for a summary. Please note that this article is part of a special report called "From the battlefield to the enterprise" which looks at why some key technologies -- deployed on a massive scale in Afghanistan and Iraq -- may hold promise for corporate IT."
With DARPA and DoD's never ending penchant for technology to solve every problem, I see potential for numerous problems with the "wired soldier". DoD has a bandwidth problem now trying to control and get imagery from airborne Predator UAV's, what happens when you wire the individual soldier? Where is this bandwidth going to come from? Can this be subject to monitoring and how is it going to be secured? For that matter can it withstand an EMP pulse? If I wanted to take out communicating enemy forces using modern comm gear that is not hardened, a small tactical nuke would do just fine. And what about the possibility of interception even if it is secure? What if a unit that has a base unit to receive updates is captured, then parts of the system (or the whole system) is compromized. This will take years of testing before it ever becomes reality, I wouldn't hold my breath.
FYI, being a pacifist doesnt make you immune to violence from others.
This guy is way out there
.. all that fancy equipment will do if the enemy has some of those EMP bombs that they were itching to try out in Iraq. (Did they ever use one, or is that classified?)
One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
This is also why I'm against putting additional electronics in guns. Sure, a gun that self destructs if an identity check fails seems like a good idea, right up until someone loses an arm because the mechanism malfunctioned. Sometimes keeping it simple is still the best policy.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
I think the point of the article is that this technology already exists and it's the implementation that's really innovative. The challenge is making such a system practical for use on the battlefield so that a soldier isn't lugging around a couple of car batteries, a PC, bulky wireless equipment etc...
Anybody knows if FCC has some advisories about wireless devices touching your body for long periods of time? A booklet I have (from my wireless router) states that "The FCC with its action in ET Docket 96-8 has adopted safety standard for human exposure to RF energy emitted: 1) Do not touch or move antennas while unit is transmitting or receiving."
You bring up a very good point. But, when has any military (US or otherwise) really cared about the long-term welfare of its soldiers?
Look at the evidence over the years: soldiers acting as guinea pigs during the post World War II atomic bomb tests, chemical stimulants used on US soldiers in Vietnam (and bromide tea given to troops in World War I), antitodes that have lead to serious side-effects being administered during the first Gulf War, who knows how many instances of post-traumatic stress disorder, etc.
It has been said that war is a continuation of politics by other means. Politicians aren't exactly reknowned for looking beyond the short-term, and the use (or, more accurately, misuse) of soldiers throughout the ages is fact, not fiction.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
Designed especially for the American Law Enforcement user
providing the operator with sixty rounds of available firepower right on the weapon.
So American cops reguarly need to shoot 60 people without the inceonvenient delay of a reload? Blimey, it must be like living in a war zone over there.
Beep beep.
60 people? No. Try to stop a car by shooting out the tires/engine? Yes. Also, remember "law enforcement" covers SWAT teams; using 3-round bursts, this will give you 20 pulls of the trigger before it needs to be reloaded. Still a bit excessive for most situations - but better to have too many rounds than to be first into a drug den, and be up against 11 people with only enough to take out 10...
Blimey, it must be like living in a war zone over there.
Not from what I've seen - and no, the police don't carry these things on patrol! They just have a lot of stuff "just in case", for dealing with really serious problems. Everything from adapted tanks for breaking down doors, to helicopters for chasing getaway cars without endangering other traffic.
Here in the US, we're pretty generous with our "bullet to person" ratio, so 60 bullets does not imply anywhere close to 60 people. I mean, seriously, even when running with the counterstrike cheats, nobody's that good.
P.S. Last time I was in England, we couldn't find a trash can anywhere. They had mostly been removed because of the possiblity that someone would leave a bomb in one. How's that war zone thing going with you guys?
I am more then willing to give peace a chance, and as soon as you talk the middle eastern counties (among others) supporting terrorists groups and religious nuts in to giving it a chance too I will join you on stopping the arms race. Seems how I do not think you have much of a chance in succeeding at that I am going to go ahead and support my military so they can protect my civilian ass.
I say thank you to those men and women, I do not yell at them to stop protecting me!
man
No manual entry for
1. "Retreat NOW, they try to surround us".
2. "Red markers on your HUD are the enemy positions. Blue are ours."
3. With current wind and angle, your grenade launcher will reach THIS point."
4."Friendly fireline comes through here. Stay cautious"
5. "A friendly soldier wants to walk past your fireline. Cease fire for 10 seconds"
6. "Red marks enemy positions behind the wall as seen from friendly camera"
(think WallCheat in counterstrike)
7. "Nearest medic: 300m North ( --->that direction)"
8. Map with all positions marked.
9. "SOS, they are two steps away from my foxhole and my gun has jammed, but they don't see me yet!"
10. "The 2000 pound bomb will fall here: X"
Aww, that sight "+300" rising over enemy's corpse and score counter running up by 300, what could possibly encourage you to fight more effectively?!
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
SWAT teams do, yes. Most cops carry only a pistol with them, but speical units like SWAT teams need more firepower. PArt of it is simply the threat of overwhelming force can often difuse a situation. If a gunman is faced with 10 heavily armed SWAT members, they are much mroe likely to give up than if they are faced with one normal officer. However, part of having that threat is the need to be ready if you get called out on it. It wouldn't do any good to have guns that just LOOK scary, they need to be powerful as well.