Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Military Builds MMO Earth Simulator

Posted by michael on from the one-is-not-enough dept.

transient writes "BBC reports that the US military is creating a second Earth with help from There. At the moment, only Kuwait City has been modeled, but the ultimate goal is to model the entire Earth using existing terrain data and a super-accurate physics model. While combat will be part of the game, 'the emphasis in the artificial Earth will be on human interaction rather than conflicts involving lots of military hardware.'"

7 of 525 comments (clear)

  1. Choose your weapon... by American+AC+in+Paris · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Which do you think will win the War on Terror--guns or minds?

    It makes sense that they'd do this. After all, there have to be a few people at the Pentagon who understand that you can't make people stop hating you at gunpoint, and that they'd do well to have a simulator that allows them to get a feel for the social environments where terrorist organizations have the best luck in recruiting. The more they understand the role society plays in terrorism, the better they'll be able to counteract it.

    Break recruitment, and you're dealing with a handful of international criminals rather than a terrorist network.

    --

    Obliteracy: Words with explosions

    1. Re:Choose your weapon... by dave420-2 · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Any idiot can kill someone - it takes brains and dedication to talk someone over.

      If the US is fighting for democracy and justice, it has to play by the rules, otherwise its demonstrating a massive love for hypocrisy. Killing people because some people were killed is only going to make things worse. By your logic, there would be peace in the middle east by now.

      Just because it's easy, doesn't make it right. Your argument is very immature, and short-sighted.

      This "war on terrorism" is more than people fighting people, but ideas fighting ideas. You can't shoot an idea.

    2. Re:Choose your weapon... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > you can't make people stop hating you at gunpoint

      Like hell you can't - it's all too easy to make someone stop hating you at gunpoint. Just pull the trigger. It ain't pretty, it ain't nice, it's hard to do thoroughly, but it works despite protests over its obvious brutality.

      Different issue. You can stop someone hating you by killing them, but for every person you kill, more will begin to hate you. The only way to stop people, in the plural, hating you, using violence, is to kill everyone who doesn't support your policy of mass murder. That's not going to do much for the future of the human race.

      That's why the "war on terror" will never be won with military power. Even the evil terrorist bastards you kill were the parents, siblings, or children of someone who will hate you for killing them. And for every evil terrorist bastard we've killed recently, they've also killed or wounded dozens of innocents: how much love do you think they're going to have for us for that?

  2. Super-accurate physics for...what again? by NewbieProgrammerMan · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "While combat will be part of the game, 'the emphasis in the artificial Earth will be on human interaction rather than conflicts involving lots of military hardware.'"
    Yes, I expect you do need a lot of super-accurate physics to figure out the various aspects of "human interaction," like....um....well...simulating football games and handing out relief packages. ????

    Maybe they're talking about military tactics or something when they say "human interaction," but to me it seems like they're trying to say "no, really, it's not a military-oriented project." Come on people, this is the Army. If this system is mainly for military purposes, then just come out and say it, ok? Really, we pay you guys to worry about situations that involve "lots of military hardware." There's no need to pretend that you're really trying to solve world hunger or something.
    --
    [b.belong('us') for b in bases if b.owner() == 'you']
  3. See you on your own by j0n4th4nb34r · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe Violence settles the argument in the short term. But to settle all your arguements your gonna have to kill 6 billion people because for each person you kill your gonna piss 10 more off.

    --

    MacOS X, I've upped my standards, Up Yours...
  4. Best interests? by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Problem is, everyone has a different idea of what "best interests" means. Joe McCarthy certainly had the best interests of the US in mind. So did communists. They just had different best interests.

    J Edgar Hoover had the US best interest in mind when he framed Martin Luther King, Jr with forged audio tapes of bogus conversations.

    McCarthur had the US best interests in mind when he tried to start WW III with Red China.

    The generals who had plans in the early 60s to fake terrorist attacks in the US and blame it on Castro had the US best interests in mind.

    Oliver North had the US best interests in mind.

    Poindextor and TIA had the US best interests in mind.

    I myself don't particularly appreciate other people having my best interests in mind. They don't know my best interests and they don't care.

    And that includes you. To all you and your ilk who have my best interests in mind, I say FUCK YOU, I can decide my own best interests.

    --
    Infuriate left and right
  5. Re:Once again, NOT ON OUR SHORES.... by cherokee158 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think there is a profound misunderstanding of the role of the Pentagon here. The Pentagon does not initiate hostilities. Our elected politicians do. If you don't like war, don't vote for a warmonger. But don't harp on the professionals whose job it is to win wars. Because as soon as some misguided politician starts one, you can be darn sure the best way out of it is to win it.