Slashdot Mirror
Linux Powers Military UGV
An anonymous reader writes "Linux powers a new autonomous unmanned ground vehicle (UGV) that learns routes by following along behind foot-soldiers, after which it can retrace the route solo, avoiding obstacles. iRobot's "R-Gator" UGV is based on John Deere's 658cc, diesel-powered M-Gator military utility vehicle platform, with control, navigation, and object-avoidance systems based on BlueCat Linux from LynuxWorks. I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?"
If Linux can go to war, it's almost ready for the corporate desktop!
I am certain that there are many Linux idealists that will have no problem with their cute little OS being depoloyed in the machinery of war. Many of them will be more than happy to port new weapons to this platform. I suspect that some of the first batch of weapons will include the rocket launcher, the plasma rifle and the BFG2000.
I'd rather have linux do something like that, even if I don't agree with the 'that'. I'd rather have tax money saved on something like that, and also it furthers the robotics field from the open source point of view.
;)
And best yet, no blue screen of open fire
DYWYPI?
Don't worry, the goov't will be fair and release the source for it guys!
:)
And this new happens on the same day Honda made a self-driven car! Today is just full of coincidences.
Blog via SMS text messaging
/dev/random
Linux kicks ass, so souldn't it kick others asses as well.
"Nothin' runs like a Penguin"
So long as the respect the license then it's okay.
Doesn't even sound like this thing is made to kill people.
If it was some GNU/Linux based weapon that was programmed to specifically seek out and kill humans then I would have a problem, but the fact that it was using GNU/Linux wouldn't have much to do with why I would object to a machine like that.
I wonder if the DARPA Grand Challenge competition had anything to do with this? Personally I'd like to see more competitions like that. The success of the X-Prize should tell us how well competition drives creativity and inovation.
Religion for nerds. Stuff that really matters
The Deere looked long and hard into Microsoft's headlights and decided to wander off the road and avoid a crash.
Proof by very large bribes. QED.
Is there any conflict between the government and the GPL? If so, that will be neat, becuase the government will use its sovereign powers to trump anything in the GPL.
That stands to reason, as the government is responsible for making the Copyright laws.
In the Blackberry/RIM case, the government can tell the court that it wants to keep on using the patented stuff, even though the court may say that the government hasn't bought the product from the guys that own the patent. The court will then order Blackberry to keep operating, but only for the government accounts. NTP can go jump in a lake.
That is a standard its-good-to-be-the-soverign legal doctrine.
Also, the government can compel licensing of patented things -- if it serves national interest. More its-good-to-be-the-sovereign legal doctrine. There is a guy who invented a neat device that got used to splice into an underground cable. The government complelled a license and slapped some heave duty national-security/secrecy mojo on it -- the inventor is screwed.
The GPL poses certain burdens for contractors (unlike, say, the BSD/MIT license) I wonder if the government will ever say -- don't follow the GPL. The sovereign says so. We don't want the bad guys to have access to it.
This would be interesting, because many Linux contributors are foreign, and not subject to the sovereignty of the US-of-A.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
...not a religion. I am one of the those GNU/Linux advocates, and yet I don't see the big deal about Linux powering military equipment. Something's gonna power it, so in my mind it may as well be Linux. It's just an OS, a tool. And I'd trust Linux with a job of that nature, having been involved with Linux-powered ROVs first-hand.
Working in a DevOps shop is like playing in a band made up entirely of keytarists.
I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?
Oh, that's nothing. They'll totally blow a gasket when they find out what the "D" in DARPA stood for. Perhaps a mass boycott of the internet will result.
In other news, the fighting in Iran stopped for several hours yesterday when American college students hacked into a group of the Army's UGVs and used them to simulate games of Nintendo's RC Pro-Am and Mario Cart. Fortunately, control was restored later in the day, but not before the battlefield had been strewn with bananas, ricocheting tortoise shells and decoy power-ups.
Robots fighting eachother is better then men fighting eachother. Sadly, I think it will mostly be bots fighting men, but whatever.
autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
"I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?"
Wipe them out... all of them.
Dude, what could be scarier then an ARMORED, ARMED, SUPERPOWERED, and automated DEATH PINQUINE? I LOVE THIS IDEA!! We don't even need it to have a gun, enemys would run in fear....at least I would....a giant automated killing pinquine....(Note to self, build death pinquine running on linux....)
Well if it isn't the leader of the wiener patrol, boning up on his nerd lesson...
From the OSI definition:
"The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research."
Its part of Freedom; freedom to do anything with it they want. Think of it like free will. If a God gave it to people, then they were free to do stuff that he didn't like, but thats part of the package deal.
DYWYPI?
Well, inventions get used in different ways. Scientists easily dismiss such notions. As would software developers, I suppose. But since the poster touched upon this topic I would really like to know how the Slashdot crowd feels about this issue. Should scientists be more sensetive about possible missuse of their findings?
One argument would be: If I don't figure it out, someone else will come along later on. So by not discovering dangerous stuff it merely prolongs the danger.
A good example would be genetic research, which bears huge potential as well as risks.
IMHO researchers should not stop researching altogether, but be more sensitive and think about possible missuse beforehand. Also they should be much more vocal about the possible dangers that come with using the knowledge they helped to gain.
I think it's great. We're talkin' about a frickin' cart here, not Giant Robo, and I'd rather have the Army use Linux than give some contractor 2 billion dollars to develop an operating system from scratch.
I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?
Excuse my French, but SUPER-FUCKING-COOL.
I eagerly await our new, Linux based Robotic F/OSS Overlords!
HAHAHAHAHA
For some reason, this joke feels funnier this time.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
So far, the balance of the comments seem to be in favour, or at least neutral to the idea of implementing Linux within a device that will no doubt end up killing a good few people. In contrast, should Linux ever be used for DRMs, which have, as far as I know, not killed anyone, most people here would be up in arms, if the recent story on GPL and the DRM is to be taken as a guide.
Don't ask don't tell.
So, it follows you out where ever you go, and finds its way back without running into anything. Good thing they used linux....I suppose they might have had to drop features otherwise.
On the other hand...we can all imagine a beowulf cluster of these. You know the army is.
http://www.crispypix.com
CrispyPix enhances images right in your browser!
If unmanned weapons of death are controlled by a cute penguin... then I have to wonder what sinister plots the daemon might have in store?
Let's face it, most any new tool is going to have military implications. Airplanes got co-opted into war quite soon after they were proven practical, but the world is a better place for having them. Conversely, rockets were developed as weapons of war, but have been essential in the (mostly peaceful) exploration of space, not to mention putting up satellites. Satellites themselves come in distinct varieties for reconnaisance use and civilian (mostly communications) use.
Most every sword has two edges. It all comes down to who is swinging it.
Mal-2
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
Windows have war tools built in and easy to access -- The Blue Screen of Death!
Fight Spammers!
That vehicle would seem to be more in the spirit of the original Jeep than the Hummer is, though personally, in hostile situations, I would still want something like a body with armor.
Since iRobot has strong MIT roots and congratulated the first hackers who modified their Roomba. Later, iRobot released full specifications for the original Roomba and more hacking efforts bloomed.
Oh, and as for the government? This is the same government which released BRL-CAD and NASA World Wind, and sponsored the development of the Reiser filesystem and OK WebServer (kicks Apache in the ass for dynamic sites) among countless other open source projects. Oh, and heard of SELinux? From the big bad NSA? This is all irrelevant though; the DoD did not design this vehicle, iRobot did. iRobot owns the code, not the government
...the last thing I need is fucking Clippy popping up in my rifle sights.
"It looks like you are attempting a center-of-mass shot at 250 meters. Would you like help?
O Get help taking the shot.
O Just take the shot without help.
O Get help relocating your target, who is long-gone by the time you've finished mousing around this lame-assed help interface."
blog |
I've just got to know planet you come from--the three year olds eat diesel, have standard equipped GPS, four wheel drive... And... M-16 compatible rifle holsters?! Dear god man, that sounds like quite a beast!
As for distribution - militaries exchange technology. The British buy from the Americans and vice versa, for example. That will certainly be covered by the GPL, which means first-tier allies of the US are likely to get hold of such code at some point.
It's unclear what this would mean for the - uh - dodgier arms deals. (The contra scandal, the sales to Saddam Hussein, munitions to Osama bin Laden to fight the Russians, etc.) Would the US Government feel obliged to honor the license when it conducts illegal arms deals? Probably not. If the technology proved that vital for them to use, they'd find a way to use Eminent Domain or some such rule to claim exemption or ownership.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Weapons? I see... But you've forgotten to elaborate on porn.
"Arab" oil only just makes it into the top 5 of US oil imports. Most of our oil comes from the Americas, North and South, and Nigeria. Saudi oil takes the number 5 spot. "Arab" oil is much more important to Europe and Asia than it is to the USA.
I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?
Considering all it does is run a patrol and alert when people are coming INTO a base presumably up to something dastardly - I imagine it would feel pretty good to deploy something like that would help save lives.
Would it help the submitter if the first deployment were to patrol a buidling full of bunny rabbits and baby chicks to keep wolves at bay?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
3 things about computers: they're alive, they're self-aware, and they hate your guts.
The Nintendo emulator won't cluster that well and isn't CPU intensive enough. Now, if you'd said that they'd uploaded copies of bzflag and freeciv server on one, xmame on a second and were doing a distributed compile from scratch of Gentoo or Fedora Core on the rest, it would be believable. :)
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
What a hokey question. DARPA has invested millions in Linux and BSD. Two obvious examples are TCP/IP and PostgreSQL.
Oh well, what the hell...
I am pretty sure that Linux is really the only option for something like this for several reasons: /var/enemy/combatants/"
-OS X would simply look too damn sleek and sexy for military use
-Windows
*Blue Screen of Death (not helpful in tactical situations)
*As mentioned before, Clippy would probably be a liability in the field
*Do you really want something like Sasser to cripple the military?
*In a battlefield situation is one Tuesday a month enough?
-The proprietary Diebold voting machine system
*hahahahhahahahahaha
-Arm this thing with some serious firepower and "rm -rf" means something
-Arm this thing and alias pWn="sudo rm -rf
-BeOS just flashes the things headlights
I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?"
Isn't that the point? Free as in speech, not as in beer means that sometimes someone might do something with your creation that you don't like or agree with. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.
Arr! The laws of physics be a harsh mistress!
wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?
, 00.asp?kc=BAZD103019TX1K0100547
Look, nobody wants to fight a war. But, if you are gonna fight a war, you wanna win!
Given that, you use the best tools available. God forbid, we should use the Windows CE that has been such a bitch in intelligent cars! http://www.baselinemag.com/article2/0,3959,833424
'nuff said!
Correction--- Saudi Arabia was number 3 in October '05
They have an obligation under GPL to supply the source code to GPL-covered pieces to whoever purchases the software. Which I guess iRobot would have to do anyway when dealing with DOD.
Possible problems with this idea.
1) It cannot climb stairs.
2) It cannot traverse rocky or uneven territory (unless there is a flat platform to follow)
3) Sooner or later, a software bug is going to turn "Automous Robotic Follow Mode" into the military version of "Carmageddon" as it runs down the soldiers in front.
4) Enemy soldiers are going to have a convenient aim point for rifle-grenades and similar whenever they hid, because this big ugly robot is going to follow them right up to their hiding place.
5) While attempting to walk silently, Soldiers will be very easy to hear coming, because of this noisy robotic lapdog following them.
6) Exhaust fumes will give it away also.
They could at least give it a plunger and gun, and teach it to say "Exterminate".
Overall, an electric robot might be useful, but this will contribute to casualties. "Don't fire until you see the whites of their eyes" will be replaced with "until you smell their exhaust fumes"...
GrpA
Enjoy science fiction? "Turing Evolved" - AI, Mecha, Androids and rail-gun battles. What more could you want?
Penguins do.
""Arab" oil only just makes it into the top 5 of US oil imports. Most of our oil comes from the Americas, North and South, and Nigeria. Saudi oil takes the number 5 spot. "Arab" oil is much more important to Europe and Asia than it is to the USA."
But that consequently makes Middle-Eastern oil just as important to the US, because it never really is about how "much" oil is sold to US buyers, but at what price.
If, say, al-Qaeda ever gets organized enough to shut down Saudi oil production in a coordinated strike, where will Europe and Asia get their oil? That's right! From the same places the US currently gets its oil, driving up the prices of energy and driving a stake into the heavily transportation-dependent US economy.
You see, we can always "get by" with less oil, but is the economic cost acceptable? For instance, what powers most of the data centers, server farms and other underlying infrastructure for the internet? Hint: it's not hamsters on wheels. If energy prices skyrocket, do you think the corporations will simply suck it up or do you think they'll pass the costs onto the consumer?
Light a fire for a man and he'll be warm for a day. Light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
http://outcampaign.org/
Yeah, maybe the military industrial intelligence complex is going open source. This is great news, we can all have a hand in it ;)
... to see what would happen if iraqis have a similar robot running Windows Mobile 2006 (tm) :D
I love humanity, it is people I hate
You mean, like, make it unconstitutional???
Free Software: Like love, it grows best when given away.
First off. This ATV/Golf cart thing isn't going to be killing anyone unless it runs them over....probably several times considering it's size. There isn't a single piece of weaponry, automated or otherwise aboard this thing. Though Marines will probably figure out a way to attach a manned M240 to one, but if the shooting starts, it's probably going to be taken off autopilot. At least I would hope.
In any event the "practical" uses of this thing aren't practical at all! I mean, it's cool and all, but there is no way in hell the military is going to let these things roam around Iraq unmanned. They will never leave eyesight.
Consider my deployment in Iraq. My Marine Reserve unit built a 100 mile temporary fuel supply line from Kuwait up into southern central Iraq. Every few miles along this pipeline at "booster" stations a fire team of Marines were stationed to man the pumps. Every day a manned convoy would leave the central logistical support area and resupply the troops along the line with food, water, mail, ammo, etc.
Here's what would happen if the Military let this thing re-supply the troops autonomously.
1.) By the 3rd out of 17 booster stations all the good MRE's would be rat-fucked out of the boxes.
2.) By the 4th booster, all MRE's would be gone and somone would have pissed in the remaining water.
3.) The next day, when the thing hadn't come home and booster stations 6 through 17 called in wondering where their water was, a convoy would find it between booster station 5 & 6 with no engine, no wheels, and no usable sheetmetal left.
4.) The bedouins across the way would have an oxcart with brand new wheels a new engine on their generator and a new green metal patch on the roof of their tent.
So, it's really not unmanned. It's only a toy that Marines are going to be responsible to look after, take care of, and never let out of their sight. I suppose it could be useful to carry things while you are on a patrol, but that's what your pack is for anyway.
Be Safe! Sleep with a Marine. Semper Fi!
...I think there's a much bigger swords/plowshares issue with the John Deere engine than the OS.
There's no failure quite as dissatisfying as a complete and total solution to the wrong problem.
Which I can't resist:
;-)
" I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?""
Linux user not necessarily an idealist, though Debian folks exist
cute little OS - well depending where it is used Linux can be neat and tiny or huge and scary, but cute little it is certainly not, I wonder if article submitter is perhaps BSD user as some of them feel so superior that they need to criticise other OSses but they are so clever that you don't notice it immediately.
It is like Finnish rules of "vittuilu" (irritating, flamebaiting, trolling another person) it is best when it takes the victim week or two before he/she suspects that he/she indeed is victim of "vittuilu" That line is done poorly as it irritates directly.
Better phrase could have been "Yo Linux Fans Now You Are Military Approved Isn't It Nice" or "What do you think of the choice of Linux in military system, real flower power ?" (of course that real flower power part should be linked to that graffiti ad campaign"
Not all inventions are products of warfare or hostility. In general, inventions are a product of need, with greater need yielding greater inventions. War generates need, so all wars will see inventiveness increase, but need does not require war. It is a one-way relationship.
Should the military use GPLed technology? Provided they honor the license and the spirit, yes. I believe they should. In fact, I'd almost prefer it if it were mandatory. Why? Because if you share what you are doing - even with a limited few - and reduce the secrecy, you will also reduce the sort of paranoia that tends to lead to conflict. If you look at the recent war with Iraq and the building tensions with Iran, what is the common factor? Secrecy on all sides, paranoia on all sides, resulting in tension and finally hostilities. Furthermore, it is between highly unequal forces, leading to the notion of an eventual "victory". Near-equal forces, as existed in the "Cold War", are much keener to avoid conflict. GPLing the armed services, therefore, could be one step towards reducing the need for military interventions.
Then there's the "viral" nature of the GPL. Again, this assumes that the GPL is honored in spirit and in letter. The technology will be sold to close allies, who can then alter the sourcecode for their own needs - within that particular system and for other devices. Those other devices will therefore carry GPLed code. Eventually, through enough such steps, the code will reach dual-purpose technology. Probably pretty quickly, too. When that happens, all of the improvements will flood back into the civilian world.
Finally, I believe that there are members of the armed services who value the Open Source community and want to sustain it. The military, more than anyone else, know how to make software secure. In this day and age, with viruses, trojans and worms running rampant, I certainly think that the military could play a major role in reducing or eliminating malware. They know more about trust systems, authentication of information, controlling access without debilitating operations, fault tolerence in hostile environments, high volume information processing without inflicting DDoS attacks on themselves, etc, than anyone else. That knowledge, donated back into the F/OSS community, could revolutionise computing as we know it. I don't think it can hurt to give them the opportunity.
Yes, Einstein regretted the bomb. Arguably, nuclear weapons technology was a bit of a mistake - it wasn't needed to get Japan to surrender and has opened up more cans of worms across the world than I care to imagine. Arguably, though, it was inevitable. There have been natural runaway reactions, so someone would have discovered how to cause one eventually through simple geology. Either that, or through a nuclear reactor accident.
(Knowing more about the nature of critical mass reactions may actually have prevented far worse accidents than have been caused through malice. We'll never know the answer to that one, but it seems a possibility.)
Uncontrolled nuclear explosions, through proposed derivatives of the Orion Project, may yet have a valuable function in space exploration, too, in a way that might not be practical by other means. When people say that something can cut both ways, they usually mean that there's a negative side to something appearing positive. What they forget is that the statement doesn't stop there. It also means that - if you choose to seek it out - there can be a positive side to something that appears negative.
I'm not sa
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
"I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?"
WOOOOOOHOOOOO, finally we'll have an unmanned fighting machine that kicks butt.
I like feeling the pleasure of knowing that Linux runs on thousands of thousands of servers that run PORN. And I have the great pride in knowing now that Linux is kicking ass in the battleground and protecting my rights to download PORN. And keeping some bunny lovin' desert dweller at bay from taking over our rights from downloadin PORN. Amen and god bless
Software, like any form of technology, is just a tool. It will undoubtedly be used for purposes that turn out to be disapproved of and stopped by society, and others that turn out to be a net benefit. Sooner or later, people will fix any problems that arise.
You aren't going to *stop* someone from using software to do anything, so why try to use peer pressure to prevent them from doing so? Me saying nasty things about some Linux guy that works at a defense contractor isn't going to do anything to actually, y'know, reduce the use of Linux in weaponry.
Nor will war or killing people be stopped by attempting to withhold the very latest, most efficient technology from those who want to use it to impose force upon others. A human can kill another with their bare hands, if necessary.
Thus, the question becomes "Would I prefer to have lots of my tax dollars being flushed down the toilet at a defense contractor so that some developers there can reimplement an OS, or would I prefer to have that paid-for-effort used in something like Linux, where everyone can benefit from improvements?"
That question is pretty easy to answer, in my opinion.
Any program relying on (nontrivial) preemptive multithreading will be buggy.
I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?
I feel like Einstein after the two A-bombs on Japan. I feel like Mikhail Kalashnikov seeing his designer gun on TV where it was used to pump up a couple of hundred kids.
Seriously, what's wrong with Linux being used in this project? You a Windows user man?
So would the targeted person be able to read the written offer before the warhead detonated?
Does that mean that someone in Ira?, upon finding an undetonated warhead, could obtain its GPLed source code via the written offer?
After all, how likely is it that the US military will go three years without shootting something at someone somewhere?
Maybe it can get in on some of that money being thrown around to Halliburton and company.
Furthermore there's plenty of people who contend that any legitimate technological, medical or industrial advances ultimately stem from the spinning off of military technology and maybe some of these people will actually get on board instead of just shouting from the obstructionist bandwagon that all this Linux hippies are just bong smoking pussies.
I just found out there's no such thing as the real world. It's just a lie you've got to rise above. - John Mayer
Anyway, cool post! Wish I had mod points right now... :-/
Some new programming language?
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
Excellent point! Like it or not, guys, many of the things we enjoy today are the result of military advances. The best thing would be if this would benefit Linux somehow, which seems a little unlikely, but we can hope, I guess.
You're too close.
Slow down.
I can't keep running forever. Stop.
Stop following me!
Stop! Leave me alone!
Please don't... No! NOOOOOOOOOOOOO! AHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! {crunch}
I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?
Ideally, we wouldn't need have a need for war machinery. Realistically, we will have more wars, and there will be machinery involved. If the choice of OS for that machinery is Linux or Windows, I'll gladly choose Linux. An inopportune crash or virus infection of a Windows-controlled machine can result in the loss of lives, be they friendly soldiers or innocent civilians.
Be afraid, there is a killer penguin looking for you. Be very afraid.
Linux is packaged together with the custom software. Does this mean that the software must be made available to anyone who will ask for it?
Unlike the processing of uranium, the cost of entry is low. What's next, open source cruise missiles navigation systems?
The only problem with this is it is going to provoke an angry attack by rms. But then everything provokes an angry attack by rms.
The Rapture is NOT an exit strategy.
$ sed 's/Iraq/Iran/g' *.c
$ make install
war.c: In function `analyze_country':
war.c:42: warning: variable `Iran' might possess nuclear weapons
"I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?"
... you partial to some other "cute[,] little OS" friend? Speak up if so. Enlighten us as to why it so perfect as to be *not* chosen for this task.
"...cute[,] little OS" eh?
Sir, do ponder for me this, is it little and cute in t3h G00gl3Plex? Just asking, you see.'Cause, last I counted, that "cute[,] little OS" is pounding down several billions of dollars worth of work (ads, blah, etc, stuff, blah, fucking read the WSJ if you need more).
Yes, thousands of servers, churning away and "destr0ying t3h fr33doms!!!!" - they are running that "cute" OS.
Nice shot at the GNU/Linux folk
Oh, and FYI genius, 'tis not a killing machine at this time. But save your hot-air, plenty of other "killing machines" are running that "cute[,] little OS" as I set you straight in your wanderings.
God help us, you aren't an editor of anything are you? Speaking of Eds, who let that shat line through anyway?
Does the shell prompt ask you if you want armor piercing, high-explosive, or incendiary?
Developers developers developers. Whooo! Whoooooohoo! - EXTERMINATE! EXTERMINATE! YOU WILL BE EXTERRRRRRRMENATED!
Oh God NO! What have we DONE?!
If it weren't for Balmer then Microsoft would be no fun at all.
I for one welcome our new robotic overlords.......
Do NOT goto this URL http://www.forthesims.com
"I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?"
The same I feel about Linux servers being used for spam: I'd like to slowly disembowl the spammers, but what does the OS (by definition a general-purpose tool) have to do with that?
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Leave it to the government/military to turn something "nice" into something that will help kill others....
Regardless of all his other conflicting emotions about the bomb, I'm certain that he was glad he helped create it for the allies, instead of waiting, and letting Japan or Germany discover it first.
Nazis with nukes? Japanese with nukes? Anyone?
Imagine for a moment if Iran had been the first to discover them?
Maybe some of our Linux idealist understand some things are worse than war. Just ask some of the poor folks in N. Korea, or some of the folks that survived and are witnesses of the holocost. Linux in defense of human dignity and fredom is beautiful thing.
The John Deere platform is only available to military users. It has a really nice, small, advanced Diesel engine so should be very cheap to run. It looks dirt simple to work on. Far from being restricted, they should be giving them away with a grant to anyone working on autonomous vehicles, and to me. Because I want one. No, make that two. In fact, give them away free to anyone who has ever worked in vehicle research, because you will then see the state of the art in autonomy advance by leaps and bounds. Why? Because there is currently no suitable cheap, widely available platform. The Darpa challenge was won by a modified VW van, with a huge array of platforms behind it. Standardising around a simple, low cost, low power vehicle which is already tough would put future teams on a level playing field, ensuring that it was the superior systems that won the day, and that no-one could profit from their ability to buy mechanical muscle.
Pining for the fjords
READY.
PRINT ""+-0
A way to use Linux, for the really important things in this world, like KILLING PEOPLE!
I think that was one of the milestones in Doc's Cluetrain Manifesto.
"Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
As someone who works in the defence industry I'd rather see Linux being used where applicable than a certain Redmond based OS - atleast when an app breaks on linux the rest of the system chugs along, the source code is there so if we have a specific issue we can trace all calls right back to the os kernel calls if needed and fix where needed etc etc etc.
Apart from that what's cute got to do with Linux?
--- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
What I wonder is how Mr. Gates feels about his big, fat, ugly OS NOT being used in this war machine.
How difficult would a "not for military use" licence be to write? How could it be defined so as to allow as broad as possible use without allowing the covered software to be used in the development or operation of military equipment/operations? While many multinationals which do important work which we might like to see use our code for good purposes also do work for the military. Would there be a way to ensure that they could still use it for purposes we approve of (medical/scientific research and devices)? How do we disallow use by and for the military/espionage while still allowing the "white hats" (doctors, teachers, etc...) use? Is there a legally binding description anywhere (U.N., U.S. law) of what military technology is? Obviously, such a licence wouldnät be for everyone (it shouldn't be in the GPL), but for those who want it, could it be an additional licence/extension in addition to the GPL? not easy, but I know I'd use it if it was available. And obviously, if you didn't want to use it, you wouldn't have to, so please understand I'm not trying to start a debate on whether *you* should support the military. I only want to explore the option of not supporting it for those who so choose. Onnel
The implications for this are a lot more complicated than just whether or not some pacifists who also like Linux are going to be offended by it being used for wartime. Consider the following...
The foundations of Linux are international. Is it really in the best interest of a military to use a technology that is contributed to by someone who might be from a country whose interests are contrary to your own? Or, to put it simply, if you're the American Armed Forces, do you want to rely on an OS that might have had components developed by an Iranian? Perhaps code review could deal with that sort of problem. But what about the flipside? If you're a developer for Linux, are you going to want to contribute to a project that might lead to your own doom just because your country's ideals differ from another country who's using that technology for their military? Imagine knowing that you developed a driver that was at work on some computerized war machinery that bombed your own family's home.
The day may come where you sit down of a Satuday afternoon, turn on the television only to see in bold writing: ROBOT WARS: The Linux based killing machine "Torvaldarus" vs the unpredictable Windows based "Gatesarus", to the death.
Give anything to the state, they'll use it to kill you with.
If we're lucky, they'll train a new version to follow USPS postmen around and then maybe we'll actually get some mail delivered in less than a week.
Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
No one gives a fuck if Linux powers another obscure device.
Nearly all diesel engines can be improved by using a turbocharger, unless they've already got one. In that case you can improve them by increasing the boost and fuelling. Not too much though, or the excess fuel diaphram will stay open and it will stick at maximum revs. And you might not be able to turn it off...
wouldn't be the first time
but i'm not allowed to talk about that
So how many of you righteous people that bashed Google for the China incident a few days back are now abandoning Linux because it's used in weapon technology?
Finally, the test results are in.
I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?
The topic article speaks about Linux idealists as if they are they only peace-loving fellows on Earth...but let's not forget that peace and war concerns everyone, Open Source advocate or not.
Watch the fuss that erupts if a well-known Linux developer gets killed by one of these things.
I reckon they could have saved some money by not having seats in an UNMANNED ground vehicle. Unless they are for women perhaps? But then why power it by Linux. Women can drive...
I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?
Enough Linux idealists already treat it like it is a machine of war...
In case anyone wonders, the struggle has been real tough the last week. We're usually a nice country interested in helping others. But when we see our flag and images of our PM being burned in the streets of Gaza, whom we have helped extensively in order to give them peace, we get pissed. It's all over Danish media and has been for months, but Monday the story also broke in the international media, like in New York Times. The 12 cartoons that started the whole thing has been republished in a series of other newspapers Tuesday. Reprints here.
Sometimes it takes guts to fight for freedoms we used to take for granted. "Idealistic" resistance to anything military can cost us dearly.
I'm in a Unix state of mind.
I don't know about you, but I use and OS (OpenBSD) that does not have flash plug-ins for firefox; and no I don't care to run in Linux emul, thank-you very much. I find it irritating to see flash messages in the advert. Today, in this article, was the very first time *I* have ever seen flash on /., and I've been a regular reader for quite a few years now.
Can /. please wean itself from these advertisers?
...can it find Sarah Conner?
Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
This is exactly the reason that the idea of a unmanned/robot army is such a horrible thing. It dehumanizes the conflict and makes war less and less of a "worse" choice.
Look, last I checked, we don't need robots to dehumanize war.
It doesn't take Strong AI to get the Nationalistic or dogmatic fervor up in which thousands or millions of your own people are screaming at the top of the lungs "Death to the infidels!", "For the motherland/fatherland!" (depending which side you are on), or "Let's napalm those sons of bitches... for FREEDOM!"
I could sit hear all day and list countless examples of how normal people turn into rabid killing machines for the nation or belief and how war doesn't need technology to dehumanize attrocities.
What technology does do is make war more impersonal and amplifies what a small group of people can do to another group. As in... I don't have to get in your face and stab you with sword, but I can shoot a rapid fire machine gun at 300m and kill more men in a second than in a day with a sword. There will probaly always be war as long as man is around. Maybe there will be bits and times of peace, but eventually I'd dar say once man is in the stars and colonized other systems we will see wars out there too.
Robots might even be better than humans. Most war attrocities have occurred when the soldiers on the ground freak out because of war stress or maybe because of retaliation and round up villagers/pows and force them to dig their own graves and then shoot them. The digging the graves is often optional.(see the My Lai Massacre
Heck... Those guys might not even be that stressed out but they might be just pissed off for stories they heard on the war (see Balkan Wars)
Robots won't disobey war cimes orders nor will they have a concious thinking to themselves "gee maybe this is wrong", but as the record stands now, most humans don't seem to have a problem with commiting war crimes either given the right circumstances.
Ethical war condunct is the responbility of the government and those controlling the weapons. If you tell your robots to murder civilians, you are just as guilty as the person who told his human soldiers to murder civilians.
The benefit of robots, is and always will be the saving of lives of "our" fighting men and women. The US military will proceed with this whether we like it or not and the public will support it because it is their sons and daughters that are dying.
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
Skynet...here we come! "T101 test cyborg accidentally rams fist through SGT. Michaels skull...military switches from Windows ME to Linux."
I suspect that some of the first batch of weapons will include the rocket launcher, the plasma rifle and the BFG2000.
If you were going for the Doom joke, you missed: that would be the BFG-9000.
Yes, I did neatly sidestep the entire ethical issue of weapons development to make a snarky point about a video game. So there.
I want to drag this out as long as possible. Bring me my protractor.
Feels good. Smells good. Tastes good. Huyahh!!!
Hmmm...
Cute little OS???
Well... Isn't that special!
I don't remember it being so little myself. That must be one hell of a firmware item because in a movable vehicle, I can't imagine an OS and software running from a hard drive that is suseptable to damage from vibration, etc.
All content in this message is copyright (c) 2008. All rights reserved. RIAA is prohibited here.
If you steal a car, you are not distributing it, unless you make copies of it (with you car-copier?) to give to your homies.
The same goes for a captured vehicle or a thief: it does not involve copying. When it does, the one doing the copying and distributing is responsible for the obligation to suppy the sourcecode to all recievers who ask for it.
This space is intentionally staring blankly at you
> I wonder how Linux idealists feel about their cute little OS being deployed in machinery of war?
We're not about restricting use by field of endeavour - I see this as proof that Linux is quite capable of even the most challenging of real time tasks.
And how would everybody feel if it were being used by an enemy against you?
If something exists that does not need a creator (god) then why must the cosmos need one?
that the software it protects may not be used in any manner in devices or systems meant for war, combat or any military or associtaed use.
... how many of the linux developpers are happy with the fact that their code will be used in bombs and massive destruction devices built and designed ... hum ... in the USA ?
... wondering.
Talking about ethics
Yeah
Alot of people have problems with the military using the technology, and I think that they are projecting their disdain for the current war on all war. War should certainly be a last resort (I am *not* arguing either way on Iraq right now for the sake of sanity...) but certainly we would of appreciated these unmanned robots in Normandy. And how many of you would argue that World War 2 was a useless war? I think its short-sighted to think that all war is bad. And there are many dangerous people in the world that that would be Alexander the Great. Think about that two-bit midget man from North Korea, Kim Jong-Il. He's certifiably nuts! Even though the Chinese have let him fly off on a tangent in recent years, they are still in bed together, and one's war could easily pit us against both. In that engagement, I think we need to have every bit of strength we have, Linus approved or not.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.-TJ
Anyone have a link for the flamethrower drivers? I'm working on a cubical-intrusion system...
After looking at the article, I wonder why the soldiers aren't riding the UGV? There's two seats, surely the guy in charge would ride?
Now let's go to Nerdo and Monkey Boy's house and show them some broken windows.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
...no Recompiling the Colonel jokes?
Schnapple
Because I checked out their site before posting that, since I was interested in acquiring one, and it says exactly what I posted. It's here by the way
Pining for the fjords
Let me ask you a simple question:
Would you feel safer with a machine toting a WMD based on the Linux OS or the Windows OS?
Enough Said...
"Mentally confused and prone to wandering."
Well, if restrictions on use in DRM products is a "reasonable restraint" in GPLv3, wouldn't a restriction on use in products and devices designed to maime or kill also be reasonable?
After all, what are our priorities?
Considering this post ironic (or not) is reserved as a freedom of the reader, and the use or redistribution or publication of the post by recipients may not unduely infringe on the readers right to make their own determination. Efforts to influence or bias the opinion by the reader as to the irony, or lack thereof, contained in the post constitute a violation of the authors' rights passed directly to readers, and a violation of those readers rights to make their own determination, and are so prohibited under the terms of this license. Redistribution of this post, including this license in its entirety, is permitted as long as the license is reproduced with such publication.
When I read a couple years back about the Windows Warship, that really got me worried, not of the descructive power but envisioning critital systems fail at a crucial moment due to some minor flaw in the code. I know Linux has been reviewed better and is much more stable/secure as well as open enough that if there is a pressing glitch there is a very good chance it could be overcome quickly (on site) without a call to some proprietary OS company.
"Enjoy what you're doing! If it becomes drudgery, you're doing it wrong!" - Jim Butterfield
Hmm, but it's okay to restrict its use in systems and devices that restrict users rights, like DRM?
Interesting.
Considering this post ironic (or not) is reserved as a freedom of the reader, and the use or redistribution or publication of the post by recipients may not unduely infringe on the readers right to make their own determination. Efforts to influence or bias the opinion by the reader as to the irony, or lack thereof, contained in the post constitute a violation of the authors' rights passed directly to readers, and a violation of those readers rights to make their own determination, and are so prohibited under the terms of this license. Redistribution of this post, including this license in its entirety, is permitted as long as the license is reproduced with such publication.
Or don't you remember this?. jpg
http://www.programovani.com/wallpapers/linux_frag
Private industry needs good turbojet engines (think 747) - guess what, they were developed during wartime.
Private industry needs robust satellite networks (think DirecTV, GPS, national television networks) - developed by the military for wartime use.
Private industry needs fast communications (think cell phone towers) - developed initially by the military.
I remember a little antecdote told by somebody who worked on a missle guidance system when she met the inventor of the mouse. He made some comment to her snubbing her work for being used to kill people, etc. She replied, something to the effect of "it uses a mouse."
Autonomous Retard -- Is your camp safe? UnsafeCamp.com
>>Private industry needs good turbojet engines (think 747) - guess what, they were developed during wartime.
Uhm.... I didn't say good engines, i said fast and maneuverable planes (beyond normal airbus systems speeds and maneuverability levels). The rest of your points hold no relation to -my- post. Thanks for playing.
Tordek, Dwarven Warrior - Juegos de Rol en Argentina
If robotics means fewer people being used for cannon-fodder, I'm all for it. When we find a way of reducing all apparent need for cannon-fodder -- robotic or human -- then it won't be an issue.
Yeah, I got the joke and laughed. You raise a good question, though: doesn't this mean we can no longer sell our weapons without distributing the full source code as well? I mean, when we sell a radar unit right now, I imagine we only give them the hardware (but don't have any real idea, to be honest). Do we necessarily want to give away the complete source code to the control software as well?
I could see arguments on both side of that. I guess if they're running a pure-propietary application on a Linux system, then they're not obligated to hand over the code to that part. If they do use GPL components in the control application, though, then that's a bit different. Of course, you can replace a lot of GNU stuff with BSD equivalents, so maybe that's not a big deal either.
Anyone else thought this through for more than the two minutes I spent on it?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Am I the only one concerned how this could bring new meanings to 'Kernel Panic'?
You said "if private industry doesn't need it, we don't need it either" ... hence my post. I didn't think I needed to quote it, that the tenent was obvious enough, but aparently I was wrong.
I dare say we'll never be treated to a headline saying that the OS stopped the UGV dead in its tracks a la USS Yorktown. Cheap #^@$*^)!Al-Qanadian software....
The meaning of may post was that it could have been invented by non-military means. Even if the military DID invent it before, it does not remove the fact that the industryneeded it ALSO, and as long as the industry needs it, there exists the POSSIBILITY (I will not say that it would have done it, but they could have) that they invented it.
Tordek, Dwarven Warrior - Juegos de Rol en Argentina
Linux has been fielded in several systems that are in Iraq and Afganistan right now. FBCB2, BFT and TIMS are all running on some variant of RHE.
http://peoc3t.monmouth.army.mil/FBCB2/fbcb2.html
Linux has always been the OS of choice for super villians. If it's compatible with orbiting mind control lasers then surely it's suitable for autonomous military vehicles.
You can't really prevent this kind of thing, I mean, governments are cheap so they choose cheap software. Next to that, I like to see Linux doing anything so I have no problem with Linux-based warfare. I'd rather just recompile my kernel than worry about this.
-------
Userfriendly? Sure it is, unless you aren't computerfriendly!
/me to a classmate on FreeBSD
The rugged PDA in the photo is a Recon device from Tripod Data (www.tdsway.com). I work there, and occasionally work on that product. Anyhow the picture in the article of the device is actually running PocketPC2003, not Linux. I guess that they are just using the Recon as a user interface & have a more powerful Linux computer stashed somewhere else. Linux has been ported to the Recon though.
Damnit - I wanted my nick to be "WouldIPutMYRealNameOnSlashdot"
I suspect, in this instance, that you are correct. Linux is nothing more than the OS that runs the control computers - and it's probably stripped down and simplified. (For example - the interface code will be vastly simplified, and likely the drivers are inline.)
Linux has been used by defense contractors for over a decade. This isn't "new." They use Linux for the same reasons anyone else uses it -- it's a solid and stable POSIX based operating system; there are no licensing fees/royalties; and you get the source-code.
Regarding the other part of the OP's comment, it's a bit of strange, funny coincidence that a lot of people in the defense contracting industry are ideologically opposed to war (some right-wingers might call them "hippies"); but there are few other industries with the heavy R&D budget that desperately need smart, technical people. Einstein and Fermi were both pacifists even though their work contributed to the first atomic bomb.
You are confusing movements. OSI is the Open Source Initiative. All they care about is having the source code. The GPL, to which you are referring, is a product of the Free Software movement. All they care about is the right to use software without restriction.
They may seem to have the same goals. But there are subtle differences in implementation.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
So war is now too important to be left to the soldiers?
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
Hows that for freedom fighting against freedom
I take issue with that description more than what the OS is being used for.
That's a stupid statement.
Better: "War is Hell!"
I wonder if this entire article is anything other than a TROLL. Nope, it's a troll.
At least decommissioned robots won't beg on street corners or walk into post offices with assualt rifles when they get back home.
But what I really wanna know is how long until we get to see Keith Laumer's "Bolos" fighting to the bitter end for the honor of the regiment?
"Sic Semper Path of Least Resistance"
Interesting that even though this post obvious flame bait that tehre were hundreds of posters anyway.
FOSS liberates you