Army Plans Overhaul of Infantry Gear

nxg125 writes "Wired is running an article about a seven-year, $250 million revamping of the US Army's uniforms. One of the major obstacles is going to be how to power all the electronic devices that the soldiers will use. 'They have at least one idea, though. "Avoid the use of Microsoft Windows operating systems," a recent memo on the subject directed. FFW is going open source. Cleaner software needs less energy to run.'"

Comments

FFW is part of Future Combat Systems (FCS)...

[tcopeland]

...which already has some open source ties.

For example, the Vishnu planning engine (source code and project site here) is being used as part of FCS logistics planning.

Re:No, there are other considerations

[Malc]

The US only observes the Geneva Convention when it's convenient or they think the media isn't looking. Look at the prisoners in Cuba: the US government made up new definitions in attempt to thumb its nose at the Geneva Convention and thus bypass it. It sounds like hypocrasy to me.

Technology

[LittleLebowskiUrbanA]

Maybe we could forgo the technology that we don't need and have longer enlistments for infantry with more Special Forces type training, i.e. winning hearts and minds. Make it a lifestyle choice with more and better training, higher physical standards, better pay.
Go ahead and shoot me down but I'm going off of 8 years of Marine Corps Infantry.
Some of the new technology is great like the new ACOG 4x scope for the battle rifles. You can use them with both eyes open. My little brother is deploying to Iraq as a Marine Scout Sniper and bought his own (out of his pocket!) Eotech 552 scope. You can see from the link provided that it can be used even when half the lens is damaged.
In keeping in line with my comment about the rifle scopes/sights, the basic gear still needs to be revamped. Tear away chest harnesses are in high demand with most Marines choosign to buy them out of their own pockets rather than use the issue gear. The Marine Corps is still trying to deal with their mistake of using the MOLLE gear system. The MOLLE's plastic pack frame was breaking left and right in Afganistan and now the Marine Corps is replacing the pack with a new design.
So stop fantasizing about the choice of OS on pie in the sky dreams/future projects and get the grunts gear that works.

Re:One way street...

[Twirlip of the Mists]

There are many errors in your post. Also, your conclusion is wrong.

There are a long series of Geneva conventions that most countries have signed and ratified.

There were four Geneva Conventions, not "a long series." One hundred and ninety countries have signed or ratified (not necessarily both) some part of the Conventions (not necessarily all).

In the United States when international law is ratified it holds the same legal standing as the Constitution.

There's no such thing as "international law." That's just a figure of speech. What you're talking about is a treaty. Treaties, when signed by the president and ratified by the Senate, take on the force of federal law. They do not have the same legal standing as the Constitution. Treaties, like all laws, are subject to the constraints of the Constitution. A treaty which violates any provision of the Constitution is not valid.

(That's why, incidentally, the United States could not have ratified the Rome Treaty if it had wanted to. The International Criminal Court would have completely violated the Constitution's protection of our rights of due process, equal protection, and freedom from self-incrimination.)

Now, let's talk about law for a second. Law is legitimate only to the extent that it arises from the collective will of the people. The rules of war, such as the Geneva Conventions, are agreements made between governments without the involvement of the people. Therefore the rules of war do not comprise a body of law. They're legally equivalent to a handshake.

(So, incidentally, is the UN Charter.)

Re:No, there are other considerations

[Rayonic]

You're getting your tactics mixed up. Some are OK by the Geneva Convention, some are not.

Sexual humiliation -- Not OK.

Sleep deprivation -- OK.

Violent beatings -- Not OK.

*Threat* of beatings -- OK.

Causing pain -- Not OK.

Witholding pain medication -- OK.

Physical disfigurement -- Not OK.

Loud music -- OK.

Etc, etc.. You get the idea, the Geneva Convention is surprisingly flexible.

And all that stuff I listed, that's just for people classified as prisoners of war. If you're not part of the armed forces of a nation... well, the rules are considerably looser.