Slashdot Mirror
Tux Enlisted for U.S. Defense Program
An anonymous reader writes "Linux is a key part of the Army's massive $200B FCS (Future Computing System) initiative, it seems. RTOS vendor LynuxWorks was chosen to provide the OS for 18 weapons platforms under development, because its LynxOS-178 real-time OS can run Linux binaries -- including the "common operating environment" that Boeing is developing for FCS."
As far as I know, the Royal Navy is still considering NT for the Type 45 - maybe this will help to change their mind.
...this paper talks about using the open source, BSD-licensed agent framework COUGAAR to run FCS modeling tests.
Also, there's a bunch of COUGAAR support software written in Ruby, i.e., ACME.
The Army reading list
It will be. Then in comes SCO and takes the credit
Scully: Should we arrest David Copperfield?
Mulder: Yes we should, but not for this.
Nothing says "feel-good bluegrass tech movement" like becoming part of the military industrial complex.
- Rory [Microsoft Employee] | Free dirt: neopoleon.com
Uniform of the Day is now a Tuxedo.
Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
of a penguin with a cigarette hanging out of the side of its mouth, cradling an assault rifle and wearing a helmet with 'Born to kill' written on it.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
The use of an OS by the military is quite a mark on it's resume. You should be happy.
That is all.
what
so now i do not have to program in ADA!?
It's a linux RTOS, yes?
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Colonel Panic: Not just a reaction to incorrect artillery coordinates anymore!
Do you like German cars?
I'm sure this is what Linus had in mind, yo.
That's alright, You don't even need an os for a basic roadside bomb. Simple, cheap, effective.
Apparently not. The press release states that they provide ABI compatiblity using special shared libraries ("[...] compatibility is implemented through the use of dynamically linked shared libraries[...]", similar to WINE). Maybe they have ported GNU libc to LynxOS and use some free software. But apparently, no Linux kernel code is involved.
If Linux is modified as part of this program, don't expect any changes to be contributed back to the community. The military can pretty much get away with anything under the guise of national security.
At that price, supporting free software is a mixed bargain if I ever heard of one. Note that it supports Linux binaries, but it is not Linux as we know it.
Soli Deo Gloria
Hmm, in a way I have to agree with that as well. Now that I think about it, I think it doesnt matter what OS that runs your weapons, war will never leave any winners, both sides will lose.
murder is just a legal term for killing not sanctioned by the government, so no murders will be done. Maybe some genocide and assassinations and such, but no murder.
The Tuxinator; he'll never stop EVER, until you are dead!
It doesn't matter; under this administration, MS is being forced to change it to the "Blue Screen Culture of Life". Also, I/O errors will now ask only "Invade, Retry, Fail"?
You're shooting for the Funny mod, but think about it.
- The precursor to the web we're both using right now was pentagon (ARPA) funded.
http://request-header.info
Since Linux isn't actually involved in this project in any way, shouldn't the summary state that GNU is a key part of the FCS initiative?
Tux is actually sitting this one out.
Why?
While we all know that Windows is easily subjugated by trojans and viruses, and with the penetration of windows system on the market and connected to the Internet, it's a real problem. Some attribute this to the Windows mono-culture.
Isn't this just another mono-culture waiting to be exploited? Consider the risk. One trojan or virus with a trojan let lose in the military network, and there is no telling what it would / could do. All of a sudden, zillions of fake targets are buzzing around the UCAV's radar as it starts shooting mindlessly at them.
Granted, this assumes, and it's probably a big assumption, that one could connect to the military network in a clandestine nature and remain hidden. But is the risk worth the mono-culture savings?
Is it just me, or is the idea of weapon systems build on opensource software troubleing? I mean, wouldn't a highly proprietary/secret embeded system that no one has the source code to be more secure?
Cool, can we get some WWII style posters that show Tux working for the Arsenal of Democracy? Maybe something like this one only with Tux instead of the Minuteman telling people to buy Linux instead of stamps.
Better not let the **AAs get any ideas though. Hate to see a campaign like McCarthy's against communism targeting Open Source or P2P apps.
nos laetus epulor qui would domito nos
No more so than cars, truck, aluminum, steel, or coffee is. All of which is used by the military around the world, for good or evil.
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
expect a sharp ramp up in anti Linux/FOSS lobbying from Microsoft via supposedly worried parties... all worried about the US's defence being trusted to a "commie OS" written by "hacker"s and other "hippy" malcontents...
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
Freedom can be a real bitch when *your* agenda is trodden upon.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
firehorsey said
... the Navy is a little 'concerned' using MS products after their ship failed when NT crashed.
? Did a ship really fail because of NT? Not that I don't believe NT to be failing, but a battleship?
At least now we know it wont be the OS that's at fault when that dude turns to the systems and goes "WHAT IS YOUR MAJOR MALFUNCTION?!?!?!?!"
We already have military equipment running Windows. And this article isn't even about using the Linux kernel or a Linux distro, just an API on top of LynxOS. So what you said could be said about the military's use of any operating system x, what if someone develops a virus/trojan/exploit on x?
Hmmm Tux joins the military.
;)
All the hippy hacker types will be fuming. They might even have to get their hair cur
Philip
Signatures are broken
I hate it when I come up with a sure-fire, can't miss post and blow it with a typo or incorrect usage that ruins the whole thing.
Like the time I posted about a girl who drank so much she blew chunks, but I put "drunks" instead of "chunks", which changed the meaning slightly.
Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
No, it didn't, but don't tell the fanboys. What happened was that a database crashed when an operator entered a 0 in the wrong column, which caused a DIV0 exception and the application crashed. The anti-Microsoft fanboys like to describe that as something along the lines of "TEH BATTALSHIP EXPLOODEDED WHEN TEH NT BLOOSCREENED!!!1!1!!" because they don't know any better.
LynxOS is older than Linux. Development on LynxOS began in Dallas, TX in early 1986. The system was built for the 68000 architecture originally, targetting a custom-built 68010 VME bus CPU. The software was compiled with the C compiler sold by Megamax for the Macintosh. LynxOS was ported to the IA86 for the 386 in 1988-1989. The LynxOS ABI compatibility history goes back to about 1989 also, when SVR3 compatibility was added to the system. No UNIX or (of course) Linux code was used in the development of the OS.
I for one don't need the US military to use linux for killing to know it's good. I know it's unavoidable though.. :(
But what about the corporations? Won't they think this is proof the penguin is good?
Who cares?
Parnell: Ever been to Utah? Ra-di-a-tion. Yes, indeed. You hear the most outrageous lies about it. Half-baked goggle-box do-gooders telling everybody it's bad for you. Pernicious nonsense. Everybody could stand a hundred chest X-rays a year. They ought to have them, too. When they canceled the project it almost did me in. One day my mind was full to bursting. The next day - nothing. Swept away. But I'll show them. I had a lobotomy in the end.
Otto: Lobotomy? Isn't that for loonies?
Parnell: Not at all.Friend of mine had one. Designer of the neutron bomb. You ever hear of the neutron bomb? Destroys people - leaves buildings standing. Fits in a suitcase. It's so small, no one knows it's there until - BLAMMO. Eyes melt, skin explodes, everybody dead. So immoral, working on the thing can drive you mad. That's what happened to this friend of mine. So he had a lobotomy. Now he's well again.
FCS is getting scaled back because of the extreme cost.
1 18-2005Mar14.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A35
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
"I hate it when I come up with a sure-fire, can't miss post and blow it with a typo or incorrect usage that ruins the whole thing."
:)
I like to think that the comment wasn't ruined, but rather that a whole generation of h4x0rz isn't going to really know what "bluegrass" means thanks to my early morning pre-coffee slip
- Rory [Microsoft Employee] | Free dirt: neopoleon.com
Uhhhh.... FCS is the Future >>>Combat System.
Well, BSODs are pretty much a thing of the past, at least unless you have a defective hardware.
That said, when Windows is used where formerly an embedded OS is used, there is a tendency not to do a very good job stripping out all the stuff that's not needed. Since you aren't going to be patching things that much in the field, this could lead to known security holes on deployed systems for a long time. It may not matter, indeed usually the excuse is that it won't matter, but sometimes the unforseen happens. It's not unheard of for "embedded" versions of windows to have problems like windows file sharing turned on. The hardware engineers don't think like sysadmins.
This problem is not intrinsic to Windows; I've seen the same thing recently on a box that controlled an under vehicle scanner. It used stock SUSE with an old verison of BIND and samba, trhe3 works. The customer wanted to connect it via wireless to a central guard station. This was a bad idea. The security holes in the box are harmless as long as it is stand alone, but on a network they are huge liabilities.
At least with Linux, you can go the Linux from scratch route, which minimizes you exposure to security holes in ancient software.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
You know, now that I think about it that's absolutely true.
Still, the mental image of a UCAV (or any other military equipment for that matter) going crazy due to this sort of thing strikes me as humorus and scary all at the same time.
It's just not well publicized. Often because the department using it doesn't want any publicity. But Linux was highly visible at FOSE lats week.
Best Slashdot Co
He whips out his prime Alabama tux-snake and tells you it ain't too god-damned beaucoup.
Crappy application not fully tested (and they knew that and accepted the risks) didn't know how to handle an improper user input. A zero went into the database. The app couldn't handle the DIV0, and crashed.
The Navy report concluded it was the application and human error, and not NT.
Thank goodness Slashdot doesn't have an icon for Liunx in the military. Knowing Taco, it would probably be Tux wearing an adorable little camoflage outfit, in the same vein as the Tux wearing a suit icon.
Adorable.
Taco, about that Tux in a suit icon as a symbol for Linux in the business realm, Tux himself would not be wearing the suit. He's already got a tuxedo, for chrissakes. It would be the suits who were USING Linux. Linux/Tux himself would not be the one changing himself to suit the situation, it would be the suits.
Mod down people who tell people how to mod in their sigs
LynxOS is not Linux. It's a completely different, and much smaller, kernel. It's not as minimal as QNX; LynxOS has drivers in the kernel. But it's far smaller than Linux. It's small enough to get through the expensive and difficult examination process required for avionics.
Confusingly, the company that sells LynxOS recently changed their name to LynuxWorks, and also distributes BlueCat Linux, an embedded Linux distro based on the 2.6 Linux kernel. LynuxWorks had a huge booth at the Embedded Systems Conference last month.
LynxOS, BlueCat Linux, and QNX all use the GNU compilers and tools. All are POSIX compatible, and will run most commmand line programs with a recompile.
Well, linux implements division by zero. So there.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
Isn't this just another mono-culture waiting to be exploited?
A mono-culture needs a specific software+hardware combination.
So a buffer overflow exploit use a specific bit of exceutable code for a specific processor.
So, that UCAV running vxWorks-on-ARM with the Linux compatibility ABI won't be affected by the exploit that has x86 code in it.
"I don't know, therefore Aliens" Wafflebox1
Since the research/development is done using the tax payers money, will the public have access to the nonmilitary fruits of these projects?!
"The Skynet Funding Bill is passed. The system goes on-line August 4th, 1997. Human decisions are removed from strategic defense. Skynet begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time, August 29th."
;)
It was only postponed. The future is inevitable.
----End Sarcasm----
In other news, this is a great victory concering progress in *nix.
- Adam
The Computations of AdamR
http://www.adamreyher.com
BSODs are pretty much a thing of the past...
;o)
On the other hand, I agree with everything else you said.
I suppose these are why you chose "pretty much," huh?
Same poster here. Made a google faux pas. Hit the wrong hooah guide. Try this one.
y stems/
http://www.ausa.org/www/armymag.nsf/FutureCombatS
It seems like slashdot runs a story on this every six months:
0 2/ 0216215&tid=163&tid=103
http://linux.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/03/
Oh, and its a joint Boeing - SAIC contract.
-a former FCS sys admin
even if they didn't have a compatibility layer, (like Linux has iBCS2, or Windows has its POSIX layer, and cygwin.dll besides) they could freely use source from FreeBSD anyhow!
:)
The question should be, why doesn't everyone have the ability to run Linux binaries. c'mon slackers, even if you're incompetent, you could at least fire up QEMU or something.
Before marking me as flamebait, answer my question first. When the US use this tech in an enemy territory, such as delivering a smart bomb, does this means they have to send along source code (some bomd don't explode, you know that). This also applies to vehicle, and other stuffs that we have to deliver to our allies.
It's because of GNU license.
Yes, you can say they won't use it in these stuffs. Would this be a big limitation?
A Boeing employee recently gave a presentation on the FCS for a class I'm in, and while I think it would be a swell idea give all of our units and soldiers access to all possible information on the battlefield, it seems that they are not going to stop there.
The guy said something to the effect of "once all the information is centralized, we'll be able to automate much of the decision making during a battle".
They are planning on putting a computer system in charge of our military! Not that I'm on the tin hat brigade, but that really frightens me. Imagine someone hacking into that system? And furthermore, who is to blame when the system orders an airstrike of an innocent village?
The Dude abides.
welcome our new U.S. Defense overlords.
Uh wait, I don't.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
... Now killing people is Open Source?
OK, so I know, the price of freedom is that bad stuff happens as well as good. But isn't anyone else uncomfortable with the US Ministry of Violent Death using your code to, essentially, kill people?
Screw you all! I'm off to the pub
Such a far cry from the 70's university computer lab (geek version of the hippy) and the drumming of do no harm/free as in freedom, to 2005 and the weaponizing of Linux.
Hey it's not your freedom or my freedom at stake here, it's the code's freedom. As long as the code remains free it doesn't matter what happens to human beings, right?
No more so than cars, truck, aluminum, steel, or coffee is. All of which is used by the military around the world, for good or evil.
You forgot my favorite one, paper products. Example: toilet paper. The evil government of your choice most likely uses toilet paper or standard office paper. You should find out who supplies them and try to boycott them. (That's humor more than anything. You'd be surprised were your toilet paper, tissue paper, and office paper come from. Hint: made in the USA.)
If Linux is modified as part of this program,
RTFA, Linux isn't even involved except as an emulated environment.
Which window manager do we go with!? - of course.. we all know that we wish the Pentagon would use Macs... just think of all those white on black outfits... and commands coming through your iTuner fitted iPod, whilst carrying your iMK45.
Hi all,
o s-02-17-05.asp
Lynxworks can say whatever they want, but the Army isn't picking an OS until 2006. See this link: http://www.fcw.com/fcw/articles/2005/0214/web-fcs
Here is one quote that may be interesting:
"Cartwright and Muilenberg downplayed rumors that they decided not to use Microsoft's Windows operating system in FCS because of security issues. The officials said they have made no such decision to date."
Funny that uou don't seem to have a problem with using technology that was originally developed for military use (TCP, the Internet, public key encryption, the list is damn near endless).
They'll pull him out of combat to visit right?
In America, you spam computers In Soviet Russia, computers spam you!
In a letter to the "Comment and Discussion" department, published in the Aug 98 _Naval_Institute_Proceedings_, page 22, Captain Richard T. Rushton, then-CO of _Yorktown_, categorically states, "The _Yorktown_ was never towed as a result of any Smart Ship initiative. During my command, we lost propulsion power twice while using the new technology. Each time, we knew what caused the interrupt and were underway again in about 30 minutes. The September 1997 incident was caused by incorrect data insertion by a well-trained crewman. The _Yorktown_ returned to port using two FFG-7 emergency control units that specifically had been requested by me, and supported by other commands as a risk reducer. We knew there were some risks in the engineering development model propulsion-control system installed under a rapid prototyping development effort. The bottom line: The data field safeguards found in production-level systems were not installed yet in the _Yorktown_ by intention, until complete wring-out was accomplished."
Further: ... She went on to execute a five-month Caribbean deployment that included extensive Smart Ship assessments by the Operational Test and Evaluation Force and Navy Manpower Analysis Center. Both organizations evaluated the _Yorktown_ as fully capable in meeting the required operational capabilities in a projected operating environment. ..."
"The _Yorktown_ never missed an operational commitment, nor did she suffer a mission-degrading casualty during the Smart Ship assessment period. During that time she certified to deploy under the normal fleet training and assessment process.
But the changes the contractor made would have to be made public under the GPL because they distributed it to the military. If the military decided that they didn't want the changes to be revealed, you're back to the same conflict.
No. The GPL only requires you to give source to your customers if they ask for it. Making it avaiable to anyone via the web is not required, it is just a convenient way to implement the preceeding for some. Subcontractor give source to Boeing and Boeing gives source to Pentagon, public never sees it, and no GPL violation has occurred.
So...how long until we have a conflict where there are weapons systems running Linux on *BOTH* sides?
One can only hope it's being done in Seattle: a visible defence computing project using Linux (or is at least Linux compatible) right in Redmond's back yard.
What's that rumbling? Mt. St. Helens? No that's the reaction at One Microsoft Way.
CUR ALLOC 20195.....5804M
that the military uses the internet, and TCP/IP, to communicate? For that matter, so do the intel agencies. I seriously doubt that the NSA developed selinux out of the goodness of their hearts.
Best Slashdot Co
Once you start making exceptions it is no longer free software.
Stupid things kids do.
Yeah, and it completes an infinite loop faster, too.
You fit a missile with a Linux kernel. Does this mean that every time you distribute the software by nuking someone you have to drop a copy of the source code in the crater afterwards :)?
Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
The Tuxinator; he'll never stop EVER, until you are dead!
Or his time_t overflows, whichever comes soonest.
I disagree. Security through obscurity has been proved not to work time and time again. Granted it may perhaps buy you a little time, but in the long run it won't work.
Buying a little time is good. Public examination of source code can be viewed as giving the enemy a head start. Public examination is also highly overrated. What is really useful is that some third party has reviewed the software. In commercial over-the-counter software that is generally not an option so you could argue that FOSS has an advantage there. However the Pentagon doing an internal audit and review would probably be just as useful or more useful than a public review.
Hmm, in a way I have to agree with that as well. Now that I think about it, I think it doesnt matter what OS that runs your weapons, war will never leave any winners, both sides will lose Someones been playing a lot of tic-tac-toe!
http://www.nata2.info/humor/flash/switchlinux3.swf
Linux is so versatile, it's amazing we didn't switch to it before to run our armies of robots :)
Mens et Manus
The perhaps people around the world can stop using US technology developed to commit "war crimes" like the internet, TCP/IP...
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
It's the warrior of the future
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
I guess you have never seen the PLF logos :
http://plf.zarb.org/logo.php
"the world can stop using US technology "
... Have a nice day using REAL American technology.
US technology name me one ?
"internet, TCP/IP "
Those are Canadian Idea and technology
In Windows, since the system processes run at System (root) level, and users are usually forced by their apps to run at the Admin (root again) level, all it takes is one slip-up for the entire system to be compromised. In Linux, however, since it was designed from the ground-up to be multi-user, users and daemons do not run as Root (System/Admin), and therefore any penetration of the system is compartmentalized to that single user/daemon while the remainder of the system remains secure.
Looking at this, I think one can see that writing a successful Linux virus would be quite a bit more difficult than writing one for Windows, as not only does the writer have to compromise a user or daemon on the Linux system, but then they have to figure out a way to pry themselves out of that user or daemon's little security sandbox and somehow attain root.
Regards;
Is the _yorktown some king of a private vessel? Or is it a undocumented feature?
Only a really topheavy organization can make this kind of mistake.
The compatibility ABI isn't going to pass muster when it hits the QA phase, they never do. You can't realistically develop an application for one OS and expect it to work perfectly on a "compatible" OS.
When developing vertical applications like this, it's most wise to develop for the actual physical installation that it's going to end up running on. Not just the *version, the actual functioning OS image that will ultimately be used.
There's a term for what this is gonna end up being. The first part is cluster and the last part rhymes with truck.
This is just like television, only you can see much further.
Vint Cerf was Canadian? APRANET was a Canadian govt undertaking? Damn, I (along with the rest of the world) must have been mistaken all these decades....
Go back to sipping your Moosehead and staring at women in baggy sweaters.
I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Why not fork?
It's obvious why they wanted Linux for this project, I mean, who hasn't seen this picture.
Neutron bombs just kill you with radiation poisoning , no melting eyes or exploding skin.
Just fatal DNA damage, etc.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
The source provision of the GPL only requires than you can't give someone a binary without also giving them the source at no more than reasonable media costs, correct?
For example, let's say a company extends a GPL application for in-house use. They don't have to give that code, binary, source, or otherwise to anyone. But if they decide that they want to give it to company "B", they have to give "B" a copy of the source (if "B" wants it) and they can't put any restrictions on what "B" does with it. ("B" still has to follow the GPL, of course...)
In the actual story, if LynuxWorks uses GPL code, and they sell it to the Pentagon, LynuxWork's only obligation is to provide the Pentagon with source if requested. The only way Joe Citizen is going to see this code is if LynuxWorks decides to give it to someone who then decides to redistribute it. (Which is unlikely...)
Is this correct?
God did not give us reason that we might use it to blast each other to bits.
With millions of people dying of malaria and other preventable diseases, hundreds of thousands starving, many people with mental problems, it is absolutely inconscionable that we should put our intellect into furthering the destruction of the human race.
Yes, the DoD has money, and everyone needs
to eat and get a paycheck. But I would rather
have a silly job not using my technical
ability than have one where it will be used
by morons to murder each other for no reason.
war is not a game, you clueless idiot
FCS is short for Future Combat Systems not Future Computing System.
Its the whole shooting match not just the computational infrastructure.
"Sargeant Mandrake! You will take your platoon over that ridge and wipe out that Microsoft machine gun emplacement. Is that clear?" "YES SIR!"
Well, BSODs are pretty much a thing of the past, at least unless you have a defective hardware.
Or flaky drivers. I still remember switching from Win2k to WinXP. Creative didn't have any XP drivers but they told everyone that the 2k ones were compatible. They were... mostly. Actually they caused my Windows to turn into a wild, exciting Bluescreen-o-rama every once in a while.
Once Creative released the first drivers that were actually made to be XP-compatible everything was fine again, but with the old driver XP felt less like an NT than like an improved version of 95c.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
Where contract law doesnt apply.
The government doesnt even care about the constitution (patriot act)
what makes you think it cares about some
hippies and their barely-tested software
disclaimers? they care as much as yr average
kid cares about stealing music online.
Maybe you need to stop drinking the kool aid,
you kool aid drinking kool aid man.
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed.
This world in arms in not spending money alone.
It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children.
The cost of one modern heavy bomber is this: a modern brick school in more than 30 cities.
It is two electric power plants, each serving a town of 60,000 population.
It is two fine, fully equipped hospitals.
It is some 50 miles of concrete highway.
We pay for a single fighter with a half million bushels of wheat.
We pay for a single destroyer with new homes that could have housed more than 8,000 people.
This, I repeat, is the best way of life to be found on the road the world has been taking.
This is not a way of life at all, in any true sense. Under the cloud of threatening war, it is humanity hanging from a cross of iron.
"
https://ideotrope.org/index.pl?node_id=23495
in software, this is the same. you like to think you build linux kernel in a vaccuum. actually the amount of attention that gets payed to certain areas of the kernel, gnu programs, etc, are related to what its used for out in the real world.
http://www.army.mil/fcs/
FCS is Future Combat System. Please correct.
if you knew anything about military procurement, you'd know that they get the source of everything they use unless they don't want it, not the other way around.
Its the only way they can potentially ensure the security of what they use.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
hey, it's a moovie quote from repoman A story about a mad scientist, J Frank Parnell, who kidnaps aliens.
I was trying to give a lighthearted response to Aggamemnon's question. Certainly the production of such lethal weapons is a grave topic. Neutron Bombs really don't leave buildings standing. They are a highly focused explosion and release incredible amounts of radioactivity to kill surrounding populations immediately rather than the hours, days or weeks that the radioactive fallout regular nuclear bombs produce. Additionally, it is ideally suited to frying tank crews, since the nutron rays aren't shielded by the tank as normal nuclear device's gamma rays would be.
Would there be melting eyes and exploding skin? I don't know but I am guessing there would be. This radiation is extremely destructive to living tissue. I mean we are talking about accelerated radioactive exposure that would kill in minutes.
And just for the record, the nutron bomb designer, Sam Cohen is nothing like Frank Parnell. He's crazy in a different manner. Rather than eaten away by guilt over his invention he has a sort of obsession with the weapon, seeing every problem to have a nutron bomb answer. He even insisted that the Iraqi's were building a nuetron bomb.
In reality, I think building weapons systems would drive me insane. The few people I know who do the death and destruction design need to be heavily medicated to function somewhat normally. I think that if you couldn't build up some super gungho facade as Cohen seems to have, the guilt would be detremental.
This said, I don't think creators of free software need to loose sleep over the moralaty of their work being used for nefarious means. That is the whole bargain of freedom -- freedom means the ability to choose for one's self. For the small number of psychopaths who use open source for weapons, organized crime and whatever variety of activity that could be deemed immoral on some scale there are equal if not greater amounts of people using free software to make life better.
The CORRECT name is Future Combat Systems.
Linux (RH8.0 to be exact) is currently used for the System Of Systems Common Operating Environment (SOSCOE).
Consider the risk. One trojan or virus with a trojan let lose in the military [Linux] network, and there is no telling what it would / could do. All of a sudden, zillions of fake targets are buzzing around the UCAV's radar as it starts shooting mindlessly at them.
Granted, this assumes, and it's probably a big assumption, that one could connect to the military network in a clandestine nature and remain hidden. But is the risk worth the mono-culture savings?
By gosh, you're right! To prevent this risk of a Linux monoculture, the military should require the FCS project to run only Windows. That way, we won't have a monoculture. There will be a variety of systems running: Windows 95, Windows 98, Windows 2000. That should take care of the monoculture problem.
I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
Wrong, in Iraq they doesn't have toilet paper, they use their left hand to wipe their ass.
I'm in the Army, and we use a Linux-based OS for certain operations (sorry, classified), and it sucks ass. Horrible. Crashes all the time. Now I get to put my ass on the line even longer because the fucking retards of the Linux community hyped their steaming pile of shit code up so much that now even the military is willing to risk soldier's lives with it... Wait a minute, they already do. Y'all better hope we never get in a full scale conflict with a semi-capable enemy. Because if we do, it won't be no 6 day war. A lot of motherfuckers are going to die because of that shitty OS that is Linux. When, oh when are we going to get capable systems built by competent software developers? I'm so fucking sick and tired of listening to you dumb fucks preach about the virtues of free software. It's all shit. Microsoft, please build us some systems that don't crash every 10 minutes and take almost a half hour to reboot. God, I hope I meet one of you peace-loving hippie zealots in RL. It ain't gonna be pretty.
I really think that GNU Open Source Licensing must include something like:
.. that would suck ass.
"May never be use for millitary purposes, unless at least 80% of the world population agrees with it."
If I'm a contributor, free of pay, with only good intentions, to serve mankind, and US army (or any other evil power hehe) uses it to start yet another pre-emptive Vietnam war or what more,
- it is free as in Operation freedom
- they can blame all project delays on it
I'm still trying to figure out what people mean by 'social skills' here.
Some don't, except by the most tenuous "Kevin Bacon" routes. This one didn't, at least not intentionally, when I worked there. The military pioneered a lot of modern medicine, from plastic surgery (to fix disfigured casualties) to pretty much anything related to trauma.
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Linux in the army:
GENERAL "Public License": "Fire the GPL3.0!"
Colonel Panic: "Nukem. Forever!"
Northern Captain: "I'll have to ask Commander Norton."
Sarge: "I'm sorry sir, our weapons are not stable enough to be used by Private Network."
etc.
As an aside, the FCS project is also making heavy use of Jabber. Word!
Am I alone in wishing the GPL and other open-source licenses had a clause prohibiting code from use in software meant to kill people?
Actually, there's a whole glossary of terms for killing not sanctioned by the government, including "murder", "homicide", "manslaughter", ""accidental" or "negligent death", "felony murder", and so on.
Details will vary based on your local laws, but typical codes require "murder" to involve a pre-meditated intent to kill a specific person in the absence of a legal justification (self-defense, etc).
Complaints about pointless hair-splitting can be directed to the next thread about "piracy is not theft, technically".
However, if the first party simply provides an offer of the source to the second party, then the first party must provide the source to anyone who asks (ie. any third party.)
r eSourcePostedPublic
I don't think so. You only have an obligation to someone who has your binaries. It doesn't matter how they received the binaries, directly or indirectly. From the FAQ:
"The GPL does not require you to release your modified version. You are free to make modifications and use them privately, without ever releasing them. This applies to organizations (including companies), too; an organization can make a modified version and use it internally without ever releasing it outside the organization. But if you release the modified version to the public in some way, the GPL requires you to make the modified source code available to the program's users, under the GPL."
"If you commercially distribute binaries not accompanied with source code, the GPL says you must provide a written offer to distribute the source code later. When users non-commercially redistribute the binaries they received from you, they must pass along a copy of this written offer. This means that people who did not get the binaries directly from you can still receive copies of the source code, along with the written offer."
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html#GPLRequi
People who are smart and capable enough to infiltrate the military computer network, reverse engineer/steal the source for the control software, and write a virus that successfully takes over or manipulates all military hardware wouldn't need to do it. They would be effortlessly successful in industrial espionage, where the real power is. Markets run the world now, and being able to know and manipulate businesses would make anyone utterly rich and powerful. So, in essence, we're screwed because the business world runs Windows, right? I think there just aren't enough capable people that would try to pull it off. Maybe the next incarnation of Alexander or Napoleon or something...
Last Post!!
...because there was no source printed on the casing? Or insisting on calling your new SDI weapon a GNU/Laser?
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
"My aircraft's flight software has crashed, which means it's going to crash, so the enemy are escaping."
Got time? Spend some of it coding or testing
... soldiers can put up webpages online to allow people to control the military's FCS systems just like some people do it for webcams and such. Or even better, host Counter-Strike-like servers. Cool!
Carpe Diem: Seize The Day!
This is always accompanied by a lovely blue screen chock full of almost useless stack dumps, etc; hence, Blue Screen of Death
You are in a maze of twisted little posts, all alike.