Slashdot Mirror


Stealth Sharks to Patrol the High Seas

dylanduck writes ""Imagine getting inside the mind of a shark: swimming silently through the ocean, sensing faint electrical fields, homing in on the trace of a scent." That's what the Pentagon wants to do, says New Scientist. By remotely guiding the sharks' movements using a newly designed neural implant, the military hope to transform the animals into stealth spies."

331 comments

  1. lasers please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    meep

  2. Lasers... by thesnarky1 · · Score: 4, Funny

    All the sharks need now is lasers, and we'll be all set!

    1. Re:Lasers... by rune2 · · Score: 1

      All the sharks need now is lasers, and we'll be all set!

      pffffft you can have your sharks.... I want the Alan Parsons Project!

    2. Re:Lasers... by pvt_medic · · Score: 3, Funny

      eh, you might have better luck with ill tempered mutant sea-bass

      --
      30% Troll, 50% Underrated, 10% Interesting
      Score:5, Troll
    3. Re:Lasers... by wthomasoh · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Everyone knows there is no such thing as Sea Bears. They are a myth. Squidward

    4. Re:Lasers... by uarch · · Score: 1

      I went to school with a few people in one of the labs working on this and that was the joke they kept using around the lab at first... I think they even had an austin powers poster in there somewhere.

    5. Re:Lasers... by thesnarky1 · · Score: 1

      At least they have a sense of humor about it.

    6. Re:Lasers... by elrous0 · · Score: 2, Funny

      I actually built a laser to carve my name in giant letters on the moon once. Didn't work out, though. All I got was the "C" and part of the "H" before I was foiled. -Chairface

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
    7. Re:Lasers... by Headcase88 · · Score: 1

      **Note to mods thiking of rating this redundant**

      This post is dated one minute later than the other posts about lasers.

      --
      "When the atomic bomb goes off there's devastation...but when the atomic bong goes off there's celebraaaaation!"
    8. Re:Lasers... by sik+puppy · · Score: 1

      But someone fished em all up to make some singing wall plaques.

      --
      The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers. Shakespeare, Henry VI, Part 2, Act 4, Scene 2
    9. Re:Lasers... by umbrellasd · · Score: 1

      Frikken Lasers (tm). :-)

  3. Lasers... by dmitrygr · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Bring on the laser beams!

    --
    -------
    1. Enjoy your job
    2. Make lots of money
    3. Work within the law

    Choose any two.
  4. First "laser" post? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's nip this one in the bud...

  5. Wonderful by slavemowgli · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Ah, man: never encumbered by second thoughts about exploiting animals for warfare. Sometimes, I really think "homo arrogans" would be more appropriate (and often quite literally, actually) than "homo sapiens".

    --
    quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.
    1. Re:Wonderful by AKAImBatman · · Score: 1

      Didn't I see this in a movie once? (Or twice? Or ten different times?) I'm pretty sure I already know what's going to happen:

      One of the sharks will be smarter than the rest. It will figure out how to escape its captivity, then lead the rest of the sharks in an attack on tasty human morsels. One by one the humans and sharks will destroy each other. At the end of the movie, the hero/heroine will defeat the Big Bad shark with something lame like a live wire. The sharky explodes in gibblets and everyone lives happily ever after.

      Or do they.... ? (Bum, bum, BUUUUUUM)

    2. Re:Wonderful by 4e617474 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ah, man:

      As opposed to the numerous other species you've known that make weighty moral decisions as they ponder their place in the world? Animals kept by humans experience a huge range of living conditions from the luxurious to the truly dreadful. Animals that people use for military purposes throughout histor have been by and large kept very, very well for a time than thrown into chaotic situations where they face dismemberment and death. The big change from living in the wild is the first part of that equation, not the second.
      I'll grant you that taking animals and vivisecting them because you need to look busy when you're grant's up for renewal is sick and wrong, but don't talk about how humans compare to animals as if turning the world over to the hyenas would bring about a Utopia.

      --
      Finally modding someone offtopic when they rant about what "Begging the Question" means: priceless.
    3. Re:Wonderful by flyingsquid · · Score: 1
      Didn't I see this in a movie once? (Or twice? Or ten different times?) I'm pretty sure I already know what's going to happen: One of the sharks will be smarter than the rest. It will figure out how to escape its captivity, then lead the rest of the sharks in an attack on tasty human morsels. One by one the humans and sharks will destroy each other. At the end of the movie, the hero/heroine will defeat the Big Bad shark with something lame like a live wire. The sharky explodes in gibblets and everyone lives happily ever after. Or do they.... ?

      That's the stupidest, most cliché idea for a movie I've ever heard. You should go to Hollywood and make millions as a screenwriter.

    4. Re:Wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Using a swimming appetite embodied as a spy, or as a "herd dog" for commercial fish, will aid in keeping large feral predatory hunters farther from the patrolled areas. Sharks are strongly territorial, so let's breed BIG remote-controlled sharks and stop hearing about so many human/shark interactions in the surf. Would be a lot better for the sharks than the backlash from a single breakwater bite.

    5. Re:Wonderful by nodnarb24 · · Score: 1

      The movie you are thinking of is Deep Blue Sea.

    6. Re:Wonderful by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 3, Informative

      Well actually, Man is encumbered by second thoughts about using animals for warfare, at least the United States has a clear record of caring for thier war animals, honoring thier deaths and caring for them.

      ""Thousands and thousands of dogs have given their lives for their handlers," said John Burnam, president of the Vietnam Dog Handlers Association and author of Dog Tags of Courage, a book detailing his experience as a handler in Vietnam. "They should be honored for their bravery and courage. A national memorial will honor all dogs in all wars."

      http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/07/07 25_020725_wardogs.html

      "One such hero pigeon, "President Wilson," died in June 1929. During the Meuse-Argonne offensive, "President Wilson" flew twenty-five miles in as many minutes under heavy machine gun and artillery fire with a shattered leg and a badly wounded breast.

      Found dead at the age of eleven, he was stuffed, mounted, and donated to the Smithsonian Institution.

      The last of the World War heroes, "Mocker," died at Monmouth in June 1937. Badly wounded, Mocker homed from the vicinity of Beaumont France on September 12, 1918 with a message giving the exact location of enemy heavy artillery batteries."

      http://www.monmouth.army.mil/monmessg/newmonmsg/se p022005/m35pigeons.htm

      http://www.spawar.navy.mil/sandiego/technology/mam mals/
      http://www.spawar.navy.mil/sandiego/technology/mam mals/veterinary.html

    7. Re:Wonderful by BungoMan85 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      ^tr00f

      --
      Bungo!
    8. Re:Wonderful by Paradigma11 · · Score: 1

      as if animals would ever be encumbered by such thoughts. just get over it. we humans are animals. we are not better, nor worse. the only reason we dont see other species taking over and maybe destroying the world while at it is that they are not capable of doing so.

    9. Re:Wonderful by Moofie · · Score: 1

      I don't think I've ever laughed harder than I did at the end of Sam Jackson's motivational speech.

      I was totally rooting for the shark the whole time.

      I don't know about you, but after seeing this gem, I cannot wait for Snakes on a Plane.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    10. Re:Wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hitler loved his dog, too.

      They should be honored for their bravery and courage. A national memorial will honor all dogs in all wars.

      So it's ok to kill them when you claim you "honor" them afterwards. And I bet they were treated like real living beings instead of some kind of biological weapon by the soldiers who used them. Yeah, right.

      Found dead at the age of eleven, he was stuffed, mounted, and donated to the Smithsonian Institution.

      Wow, what an honor. Somebody should've "stuffed and mounted" General Patton, that fat asshole.

    11. Re:Wonderful by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      Best you don't think to much on where hamburgers come from then.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    12. Re:Wonderful by minsyntax · · Score: 1

      Yeah, my favourite part of the article is where it says they "gained ethical approval" to do this. So, first, they didnt' have it. Then they went to like, a panel, or God, or some such entity that grants ethical approval to people who don't have any. Next they must have filled in some formal application. "Will you harm the sharks?" No. "Would you try the same stuff on yourself?" ... And finally approval is granted, and they can be confident that whatever it is they do, they're doing it ethically. Gee, I wish *I* could live my life like that too.

    13. Re:Wonderful by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Except for the cats used for military purposes, they usually had a very short contribution to war consisting of being set on fire and flung into a besieged city using a catapult.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    14. Re:Wonderful by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      a swimming appetite embodied

      What, a remote-controlled Dopefish?

      "Swim, swim, hungry, swim, swim, attack russian submarine"

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    15. Re:Wonderful by Fallus+Shempus · · Score: 1

      But we are actually capable of doing better.
      This is just another excuse.

    16. Re:Wonderful by db32 · · Score: 1

      You are entirely correct sir. I am entertained that you have 2 other replies from ACs that have no clue what they are talking about. There was another recent story where, I believe, the Army dog handler gal was injured and the army retired her dog early so they could stay together. EVERY military dog/handler pair I have met are very attached to eachother. The dogs are extremely loyal, and the handlers are very protective and treat the animals very well, not as just weapons as the AC seems to think. I have known some units to keep older retired dogs around just because they like having them around. The official reason is often related to training the new pups and order in the pack kinda things, but if you actually talk to the people you can tell it has more to do with their connection with the animals.

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    17. Re:Wonderful by Rick.C · · Score: 1
      Ah, man: never encumbered by second thoughts about exploiting animals for warfare.

      Maybe it's just the close proximity to the Monty Python poll, but my immediate mental flash was:

      Mooooooo... "RUN AWAY! RUN AWAAAY!.... Thud!

      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
    18. Re:Wonderful by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Never heard of that. I knew about the Romans using incendiary pigs to panic elephants, but then I would, wouldn't I?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    19. Re:Wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The insects already rule the Earth.

      Jesus, Man is just kept around by the grass to chop down trees.

    20. Re:Wonderful by BewireNomali · · Score: 1

      dude, did you read the Sam JAckson interview about that movie? He was like, I didn't even have to read the script - they had me on the title!!!!!! Snakes on a plane? It has to be good!!!!!!

      --
      un burrito me trampeó.
    21. Re:Wonderful by operagost · · Score: 1

      Because animals never exploit other animals for their own gain. Like, for example, eating them. Or keeping them captive to milk their body fluids. Or paralyzing them and implanting their own eggs into the host's body. Yes, if it wasn't for humans the lion would be lying down with the lamb.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    22. Re:Wonderful by lskziq · · Score: 1

      perhaps homo superbus (arrogant human)? arrogans is mostly acquisitive or demanding, only arrogant through transference.

    23. Re:Wonderful by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      They will feel enlightening new experiences, like knowing what it feels like being caught, having your fins cut out with a machette and being thrown overboard.

      I just hope they enjoty the ride, I'm not sure the sharks do.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    24. Re:Wonderful by Casualposter · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that for a reasonable fee and the appropriate amount of scrutiny, documentation, and long boring conversations about hypothetical situations that you too can be certified as living "ethically."

      --
      Creative Spelling Copyright (2002). May use without Persimmons
    25. Re:Wonderful by XSforMe · · Score: 1

      animals never exploit other animals for their own gain.

      All parasitical and predatorial relationships I have seen on the animal kingdom are destined to ensure the survival of the parasite/predator. I have never seen a lion killing a lamb for sport or maim him to make a spy out of him. Only human beings are capable of such conduct, and even worse, in your case, only human beings are capable of justifying such conduct by trying to draw inexistant relationships between our acts and those of the animals.

      --
      My other OS is the MCP!
    26. Re:Wonderful by panthro · · Score: 1

      ...don't talk about how humans compare to animals as if turning the world over to the hyenas would bring about a Utopia.

      The difference is that humans have evolved intellectually to the point where we can cause a lot more damage to our environment than a hyena, and also to the point where we should know better but apparently don't. We have the capability and general inclination to mess with nature in ways that make a world run by hyenas look quite utopian by comparison. I don't know whether hyenas generally hold to higher or lower moral standards than we do, but frankly, even a truly evil dumbass makes a less dangerous leader than a moderately evil genius.

      --
      If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
    27. Re:Wonderful by panthro · · Score: 1

      If you didn't train dogs, pigeons, horses, elephants, sharks and what have you in the ways of war in the first place, their deaths wouldn't have to be honored and they wouldn't need to be stuffed and mounted.

      Humans go to war for a variety of reasons, all of which benefit humans. Perhaps they're defending their country against invaders, or attacking another country to boost their resources. What do the animals have to gain? They don't give a shit about invaders or resources. If they knew better, would they suddenly come out of the wild and join the military? If I were such an animal, I sure wouldn't trade my normal life in the wild for a life of captivity (well-treated or otherwise) and incomprehensible danger.

      --
      If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
    28. Re:Wonderful by 2short · · Score: 1


      Humans freely exploits humans in their efforts to do large scale violence to yet more humans. This is not something that pleases me; but given that context, exploiting some fish too doesn't bother me in the least. Of course, independent of context, chopping up the fish and eating it because it's tasty doesn't bother me either.

    29. Re:Wonderful by Johnboi+Waltune · · Score: 1
      All parasitical and predatorial relationships I have seen on the animal kingdom are destined to ensure the survival of the parasite/predator. I have never seen a lion killing a lamb for sport or maim him to make a spy out of him. Only human beings are capable of such conduct, and even worse, in your case, only human beings are capable of justifying such conduct by trying to draw inexistant relationships between our acts and those of the animals.

      Have you ever even seen a lion outside of a zoo? I haven't either, but I've owned plenty of their smaller cousins, felis catus. A well-fed housecat will kill for pleasure. They catch their prey, let it go, and repeat until the prey is dead. Then they typically leave the corpse to rot, sometimes by your front door. Feral cats, on the other hand, will catch their prey and eat it immediately.

      --
      "The advanced societies of the future will be driven by competing systems of psychopathology." -JG Ballard
    30. Re:Wonderful by XSforMe · · Score: 1

      Have you ever even seen a lion outside of a zoo? Nope, but there is plenty of sources documenting its behaivour out there. None reference lions killing for pleasure.

      A well-fed housecat will kill for pleasure. So? A well fed cat is something it would not happen under natural conditions. You would have a point if this cat was a wild animal, and would go around killing just for fun. Housecats are animals which have been trained by us to behave in a certain manner.

      --
      My other OS is the MCP!
    31. Re:Wonderful by mvrekic · · Score: 0, Troll

      One more example of american sickness and cruelty to animals. Now everything can pass as a "fight against terrorism" Have you guys ever asked why American turists travel trough europe weith Canadian flags?

    32. Re:Wonderful by shaitand · · Score: 1

      "Humans go to war for a variety of reasons, all of which benefit humans."

      I fail to see the difference between me going to war against my will to benefit OTHER humans and a dog doing the same. Regardless of honors bestowed. Perhaps we should solve this problem by banning the sending of humans to war. Only those who actually want the war and directly benefit from the war or the war's outcome will be allowed to participate.

      "They don't give a shit about invaders or resources."

      Last I checked being teratorial to one degree or another and defending food are base instincts common to most animals and instincts.

      "If I were such an animal, I sure wouldn't trade my normal life in the wild for a life of captivity (well-treated or otherwise) and incomprehensible danger."

      Hate to break it to you, but you ARE an animal; just like the rest of us. If you aren't in the military you have chosen as stated. If you were drafted or a sucker scooped up from the national guard (nobody in the guard signed up intending to do more than stand straight and do weekend training), then you weren't given a choice and are no different than the animals themselves. You are held in captivity and if you attempt ot escape during time of war the penalty is death. At least non-humans aren't killed if they try to flee.

    33. Re:Wonderful by panthro · · Score: 1

      Your general idea is very correct, there is no difference between us and animals in that regard (and I'm quite aware that we are animals, I'm referring to non-human animals). And yes, only people who want the war should participate in the war. Why the fuck would I go to war if I didn't want the war? If you go to war of free will to benefit others, you're still doing it because you want to benefit others. As for the draft and joining the guard, they're still choices made by people (voting for the former and a conscious risk to join for the latter). I live in Canada.

      Does a dog have the same choice? Did dogs get to vote on whether they were "draftable"? Can a dog pack up and move out of a state that uses dogs for military purposes? Can a dog decline to join the military training program on the basis that it might result in ending up in a war?

      The only thing in the military that compares to the way non-human animals are used is equipment. Soldiers take pretty good care of their M-16s and their boots too.

      --
      If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
    34. Re:Wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've got two German Shepherds and I love them both. But better a dog dies than a human. Animals aren't drafted as cannon fodder - they are used because they can do a job that humans CAN'T, like sniffing for mines and tripwires, or searching for survivors. Don't think that soldiers don't bond with their dogs. Have you ever seen what happens when a police dog dies on duty, for example?

      In terms of value, a human's life ranks far above an animals. Humans of course still have a resposibility to treat them well.

    35. Re:Wonderful by Johnboi+Waltune · · Score: 1
      A well fed cat is something it would not happen under natural conditions.

      Huh? Of course it can and does.

      Housecats are animals which have been trained by us to behave in a certain manner.

      Huh? Nobody trains their cat to torture its prey. It is their instinct to do so, pure and simple.

      there is plenty of sources documenting its behaivour out there. None reference lions killing for pleasure.

      Wrong, with a simple Google search ("lion toying prey"), I found several examples, even with human prey.

      --
      "The advanced societies of the future will be driven by competing systems of psychopathology." -JG Ballard
    36. Re:Wonderful by susano_otter · · Score: 1

      Some species of hyenas commonly spend the first few days after their birth trying to kill each other, and have to be repeatedly and forcibly separated by their mother.

      You also are assuming that our intellect is evolutionarily desireable in some way, or that the "moral sense" we have developed is somehow a better guide than animal instinct, or that our "morals" are even an accurate description of anything true about the world in which we exist.

      Until you have resolved those questions, you can't really begin to lecture anybody on what is and isn't morally appropriate behavior.

      Besides, given that our human nature arises entirely from natural phenomena--random mutation, natural selection, etc.--how could our treatment of animals be any more unnatural, or any more immoral, than, say, the influenza virus's treatment of us?

      How can you possibly make a moral distinction between the Holocaust and the Black Plague? Both events were caused by organisms arising from natural causes. How can one be wrong and the other right?

      Unless you're trying to say that humans are somehow "special" and "different from the other animals" in some way. But tread carefully here: we're not interested in ignorant and unscientific asshattery about creationism and intelligent design.

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

    37. Re:Wonderful by shaitand · · Score: 1

      "Does a dog have the same choice? Did dogs get to vote on whether they were "draftable"?"

      Of course not and neither did I. Perhaps being Canadian is your excuse for this but the draft was not something the public was given a chance to vote on. The public does not vote on issues here, they vote on officials. The officials run for election claiming the views they believe will gain them the most ground and then do whatever they choose in office. Last I checked, the draft was instituted without the public even electing an official known to support it.

      "Can a dog pack up and move out of a state that uses dogs for military purposes?"

      Last I checked, a dog can up and walk anywhere it pleases unless stopped, just like humans.

      "The only thing in the military that compares to the way non-human animals are used is equipment. Soldiers take pretty good care of their M-16s and their boots too."

      Yes and if you had been in the US military you would know that soldiers themselves are treated as equipment by officers and handled in the same manner. They are fed and watered like a gun is oiled. They are rationed much like bullets and you can bet they are weighed against more scarce and valuable equipment.

      This is all sensible enough; after all, human and non-human animals are no more or less than biological machines. In fact, it could be said that we are no more than complex chemical devices.

    38. Re:Wonderful by XSforMe · · Score: 1

      Huh? Of course it can and does.
      Really? Let me understand this, you are implying that cats left alone in wilderness will be as well fed as the typical house cat? Winter time and drough time will have no impact in the wilderness cat diet?

      Huh? Nobody trains their cat to torture its prey. It is their instinct to do so, pure and simple.
      Wrong, with a simple Google search ("lion toying prey"), I found several examples, even with human prey.

      You are convieniently changing my point to suit your argument. I said that wild animals do not kill for pleasure nor to subjugate others for the purpose of servilitude. The behaivour of a household cat is somthing that just does not occur in the wilderness. These kind of behaiviours are typical of the human race and taken to a new level by the US DoD in this project.

      Yet, I ran the search as you recommended. I'll give you that lions do sometimes torture their prey before festing on it, but I found nothing refering to a kill for pleasure. If I missed it, would you care to point out the exact article?

      --
      My other OS is the MCP!
    39. Re:Wonderful by panthro · · Score: 1

      You missed my point. I agree with you entirely. The "moral standards" comment was a sarcastic one directed at the parent post. I don't ascribe any intrinsic superiority to humans or any quality of being unnatural to, well, anything in the universe. So I am speaking to what is evolutionarily desirable and beneficial to our species. The way we affect our environment is clearly self-destructive. It's not about what's right and what's wrong, it's about what is good and bad for our species.

      Our intellect is by far our main biological advantage. By other animals' standards, we're slow, weak, vulnerable to disease and the elements, and not particularly perceptive. I don't understand how you can question the validity of assuming that intelligence is evolutionarily desirable. Sure, good eyesight, manual dexterity and bipedal locomotion are other big ones, but in the past couple millennia they've been eating intellect's dust as far as directly resulting in the proliferation of humankind.

      All I'm saying is that our biggest advantage has recently become our biggest peril. It's allowed us to learn to make obscene amounts of pollution and nuclear weapons and other things that could easily cause our extinction within a few generations.

      --
      If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
    40. Re:Wonderful by panthro · · Score: 1

      In terms of value, a human's life ranks far above an animals.

      Says you.

      --
      If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
    41. Re:Wonderful by operagost · · Score: 1

      Killing for sport is a straw man argument, because I never suggested that I found that acceptable.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    42. Re:Wonderful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And anyone decent.

      Nobody is saying animals should needlessly be subjected to stress or pain here.

    43. Re:Wonderful by XSforMe · · Score: 1

      Killing for sport is a straw man argument, because I never suggested that I found that acceptable.
      When I referred to killing for sport, I meant it as an example of a conduct that is not found in nature. Likewise subjucating another species like in this case a dolphin to become an agent of war, is highly questionable if not downright wrong. There is no natural relation between species that comes close to this.

      --
      My other OS is the MCP!
  6. There's someone in my head, but it's not me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "That team is among a number of groups around the world that have gained ethical approval to develop implants that can monitor and influence the behaviour of animals, from sharks and tuna to rats and monkeys."

    Lovely. And in another 10 years they'll tell you that you can't travel abroad without one of those implants.

    Who shells out these "ethical approvals" anyways?

    1. Re:There's someone in my head, but it's not me by jpardey · · Score: 1

      The ethical approval people! Ther nice peple. tey smell good.

      --
      I have freaks! I did something right...
    2. Re:There's someone in my head, but it's not me by aliscool · · Score: 1

      I am in charge of "ethical approvals" Just send me 10 bucks via paypal and I can approve you as well.

    3. Re:There's someone in my head, but it's not me by dogbreathcanada · · Score: 1

      And in another 10 years they'll tell you that you can't travel abroad without one of those implants.

      Next thing you know the American Government will be telling their citizens that they can't vacation on Cuba! America is a free country, their citizens can vacation wherever they want ...

      What? They can't? Holy shit! So, they aren't free. Hmm. Then what have they been going off about these last umpteen years?

    4. Re:There's someone in my head, but it's not me by Red+Weasel · · Score: 1

      Just for the record you can "vacation" in cuba. Just get in a boat and go south. They accept US currency, have english speaking bars and even have refueling stations for you boat. It's actually kind of fun if you can ignore the poverty 3 blocks from the docks.

      Granted the Coast Guard will give you some grief when you come back but they don't stop you from going.

      --
      ..which just shows that the human brain is ill-adapted for thinking and was probably designed for cooling the blood-T P
  7. Not nipped in the bud. by saskboy · · Score: 1

    "from the friggin-laser-beams-not-included dept."

    No fair, the editor got in the stealth shark with friggin laser beams on head first post!

    In Post Austin Powers Slashdot, Lasers frig up Stealth Sharks.

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
    1. Re:Not nipped in the bud. by gstoddart · · Score: 1
      "from the friggin-laser-beams-not-included dept."

      No fair, the editor got in the stealth shark with friggin laser beams on head first post!

      You can console yourself by pointing out that it's "frikkin-laser-beams" not "friggin-laser-beams".

      A minor distinction, but an important one.
      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  8. Need help from a subscriber... by moosehooey · · Score: 1

    I can't add one of these new tags, but someone really needs to tag this article "jokebait"

    1. Re:Need help from a subscriber... by 19thNervousBreakdown · · Score: 0

      Seconded! Marvelous tag idea :)

      --
      <xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
  9. Because Angry Striped Bass by Inhibit · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    with laser beams are in short supply these days? Seriously? I mean.. mind controlled sharks rampaging through the waters to.. ah.. warn of potential dangers seems a bit far fetched and scary all at the same time.

    --
    You're reading Slashdot. Of course you like Linux and pc hardware
    1. Re:Because Angry Striped Bass by killjoe · · Score: 1

      Hey don't be too harsh on them. The pentagon knows that sooner or later Osama is going to get tired of living in the mountains of pakistan and will move to australia to live on the beach. That's when we will get him. Osama will venture down to some beach and talk about overthrowing jeb bush and that's when we will nail him. He will never know that the sharks circling are actually robotic sharks from the CIA.

      Trust me, this reasearch is going to win big.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  10. "Newly designed neural implant" by Yehtmae · · Score: 0

    "Newly designed neural implant"

    Human model to follow soon?

  11. More importantly by amliebsch · · Score: 1

    Will they be effective against Yuri's boomer subs?

    --
    If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    1. Re:More importantly by floppypond · · Score: 1

      Sure hope so.

      We need something to even out the teams...

  12. And I thought ubiquitous cameras were bad ... by arrrrg · · Score: 1

    from now on I'm going to have to worry if my new puppy is secretly reporting back to the NSA. No wonder the little bastard is so inquisitive ...

    1. Re:And I thought ubiquitous cameras were bad ... by saskboy · · Score: 1

      Don't be concerned. I may have changed my signature, but the PFHT is still available:
      http://sask.sasktelwebsite.net/petfoilhat.html

      I've not yet tested the foil hat on sharks, but it is good underwater, so I see no reason it can't work on large fish.

      --
      Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  13. The Shark That Failed... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    Didn't that project failed when their top shark, Dick Cheney, missed the correct target and bagged a lawyer instead?

    1. Re:The Shark That Failed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You complain about anyone bagging a lawyer?

    2. Re:The Shark That Failed... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      If you're going to bag a lawyer, you need to do it legally. Now if it was a Dan Quayle, that would be a different story. :P

    3. Re:The Shark That Failed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sharks don't attack lawyers - professional courtesy, same as snakes.

    4. Re:The Shark That Failed... by surprise_audit · · Score: 1

      So when is the open season on quail??

    5. Re:The Shark That Failed... by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      Next week. Today it's wabbit season.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    6. Re:The Shark That Failed... by dodobh · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Hiss on line 3, something about being compared to lawyers and libel....

      --
      I can throw myself at the ground, and miss.
    7. Re:The Shark That Failed... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's Duck season and you know it!

  14. There's more to the page by putko · · Score: 1

    At the bottom of the page, there is a discussion of controlling the motion of farmed fish, which would allow them to be kept outside of cages. When it was time to harvest them, they'd assemble for harvesting. Otherwise they'd be free to swim around and spread their toxic fish waste, which would be better for the environment.

    --
    http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_s tone_your_children/dt21_18a.html
    1. Re:There's more to the page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forgive me for being PETA-ish, but the whole concept of forcing animals to do something by adding implants to their brains seems wrong to me. I am fine with eating animals, training animals, animal testing, and all the great uses we have for animals in our society, but this seems to be worse than killing - the animal's freedom is being taken away.

    2. Re:There's more to the page by putko · · Score: 1

      How do you feel aboout leashes, or the invisible fence (for dogs)?

      It seems quite similar to me, but far more invasive -- brain implant?

      But if, for instance, they had some little harness on the fish, that would probably bother the fix more.

      Perhaps one day it will be possible to breed fish that follow properly encoded instructions (e.g. perhaps via flashing lights).

      --
      http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_s tone_your_children/dt21_18a.html
  15. Not smart. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not a smart move. Shark populations certainly don't need another reason for people to slaughter sharks. They should implant Bush administration officials instead .. we have too many of them, and their teeny tiny brains should be easier to figure out than a shark...

  16. Two-way? by lheal · · Score: 1

    It might be interesting to teach the sharks some tricks, like jumping through rings and doing neat flips and stuff. Man, I just love it when the dolphins do that at the zoo. Real heartwarming stuff. Might help the shark image, I'd bet.

    But it would be really interesting if the sharks could learn to communicate with us using the technology. Not sure how it would work, but it would be great if the sharks were more than just droids.

    --
    Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
    1. Re:Two-way? by XorNand · · Score: 1

      From what I understand from watching "Shark Week" on the Discovery channel, sharks are dumber than a box of rocks. Even if we could somehow read their thoughts, I don't know we'd get anything meaningful.

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    2. Re:Two-way? by lheal · · Score: 1
      sharks are dumber than a box of rocks.

      That is so homocentric! They aren't dumb, it's just that their vast intelligence is focused on other things, like eating boots and anchors and stuff.

      I think we should embrace our shark friends, and give them the love they never had as ... little sharks. Then maybe they wouldn't eat us just for swimming around in their pantry.

      --
      Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
    3. Re:Two-way? by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      Also of note. Many of the things we train dolphins to do are things that would do naturally. All we can really accomplish is having them do it at our command. Sharks don't do flips in the wild, unless they get hit by something or by some other accidental force.

      Even if we could I don't think it will improve their image much. First because dolphins are mammals we tend to have a better connection with them, They have similar eyes and similar reaction and make connections with us. Sharks are much different then us when you stare into its eyes it is just an unblinking black hole, which naturally makes us uneasy. Also when dolphins open their mouths and we see their teeth it is a lot less intimidating the when shark show their teeth and the many rows of them.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
  17. How 'bout an off button? by borisborf · · Score: 1

    What will happen to these sharks if they can't eat? They have to have an off-button so that the shark can go back into normal shark mode.

    Someone will jam the signals used to control the sharks and then you'll have an immobile shark.

    This reminds me of that terrible movie "The Final Cut".

    1. Re:How 'bout an off button? by BecomingLumberg · · Score: 2, Funny
      I don't think any amount of programming can turn off the 'chompy' part of the shark. Much like Pac-Man, you can steer him around, but you can't keep him from eating everything in his path.

      I wonder if the new hacker rage will to be to boost a shark. That would make for some interesting vacations...

      --
      If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.-TJ
    2. Re:How 'bout an off button? by coronaride · · Score: 1

      Stand by mode, perhaps? I just think it would be cool to remote desktop into a shark.

      Start->Settings->Control Panel->Add/Remove Teeth.

      Tech support would be a nightmare, though...

      TS: Do you see "My Great White" on your desktop?

      CUST: WHAT?! WHAT'S *YOUR* SHARK DOING ON MY DESKTOP?

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, go into business for themselves.
    3. Re:How 'bout an off button? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I wonder if the new hacker rage will to be to boost a shark. That would make for some interesting vacations...

      nah... it'll be to make a shark webserver...

  18. I Saw That Movie by obidonn · · Score: 1

    ... on television. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0149261/ - Deep Blue Sea with Samuel L. Jackson.

    1. Re:I Saw That Movie by demonbug · · Score: 1

      No, see, those sharks got smarter. These sharks are going to have the military running the show. Soon we'll have hundreds of sharks knocking themselves out on the hulls of Japanese fishing boats off the coast of Hawaii.

      Military Intelligence, hah!

  19. First it was kitties, now sharks... by lendude · · Score: 1
    I recall reading somewhere (Jim Marrs' Crossfire?) of the experiments with cats the CIA or FBI did, wherein a cat had surgery to install a microphone in it's skull and an antenna in it's tale and was let loose in a Russian Embassy at a party? Kitty wasn't that useful as it had pretty selective attention and later ran on to the road and met an untimely end by vehicle.

    Better hope Mr Shark is trained to return when deployed or he may end up being hauled out of the ocean by a drift netter or balloon caster :p

    --
    "Get off the cross - we need the wood" - Tori Amos
  20. Hmmm by nemik · · Score: 1

    I wonder how the gun-toting dolphins will react to this....

  21. WARNING: PETA Outrage Imminent! by RoffleTheWaffle · · Score: 0

    Step 1: Lobotomize sharks.
    Step 2: ...
    Step 3: PROFIT!

    1. Re:WARNING: PETA Outrage Imminent! by RoffleTheWaffle · · Score: 1

      I wasn't aware that those could be lobotomized, to be honest with you...

  22. Then when a Hurricane hits by omegashenron · · Score: 1

    Great first it was killer dolphins which were released when Katrina hit... next hurricane we will have to contend with killer sharks...

    I really wish the US DoD would stop fucking up the world.

    --
    Excuses Are Like Assholes - Everybody's Got One
    1. Re:Then when a Hurricane hits by jdeluise · · Score: 1

      Sorry, I believe that you're spreading an urban legend.......

  23. Stealthy by msbsod · · Score: 1

    I am sure these are going to be great stealth spies, thanks to the sonar used to control them. HELLO SPY SHARK, PLEASE ENTER THE PORT AHEAD!

    1. Re:Stealthy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh man. And I thought SubSeven was bad for port scanning...

  24. Tax Dollars by dameron · · Score: 1

    Stem Cells, no, that'd be immoral.

    Mind control steal sharks? Sure.

    It's all priorities.

    1. Re:Tax Dollars by omegashenron · · Score: 1

      Stem cells immoral? Not when the military finds a use for them.

      --
      Excuses Are Like Assholes - Everybody's Got One
    2. Re:Tax Dollars by killjoe · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well god did give dominion over all animals to men. We can do whatever we want to them. We own them. God says so.

      --
      evil is as evil does
  25. A similar project had to be abandoned... by AndrewStephens · · Score: 1
    I remember reading something, I think it was in Nature, about a project to manipulate sharks brains to study Alzheimer's. It didn't work out so well and some people died. The govenment tried to hush in up, but this documentary is available and contains some chilling footage.

    I hope this new project is run with much stricter controls.

    --
    sheep.horse - does not contain information on sheep or horses.
  26. Dolphins by drgonzo59 · · Score: 1
    The Soviets already tried doing that with dolphins. They best they managed was to train them to patrol ports. They would bump their nose into a diver that wasn't supposed to be there. If they had a poison spike they could have been used to kill. They also did research into "wiretapping" their brains and turning them into something similar to the sharks in this story.

    I think that shark are way cool though, they just need lasers on their heads, and you can't beat that...

    1. Re:Dolphins by beoswulf · · Score: 1

      Dolphins have had some degree of success since the Soviet era. The US Navy is currently using them in the Persian Gulf to search out mines and other underwater threats. But humans have been training animals for thousands of years, somewhat different than bypassing their own instincts completely and controlling their brains.

    2. Re:Dolphins by drgonzo59 · · Score: 1

      The soviets tried to do that. There was documentary of Discovery or PBS about it. There was dolphin with a holes in its skull with electrodes sticking out -- but supposedly that line of researched went nowere and just resulted in killing a bunch of dolphins.

  27. Re:Lasers... (Day of the Dolphin) by sampas · · Score: 1

    I liked it better the first time, when it was called The Day of the Dolphin", but I guess they'll call it the Day of the Shark. Still waiting for a sequel.

  28. HSX IPO needed by B3ryllium · · Score: 1

    Hollywood Stock Exchange IPO Needed:

    Deep Blue Sea 2

    (it is freaking SCARY that I was talking about that movie mere seconds before this popped up on RSS :))

  29. Obligatory Johnny Mnemonic Reference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "The Navy wired Jones up with all kinds of shit" -Ice T (and Bill Gibson)

  30. Thats no norwal by lazy+genes · · Score: 0

    Its a shark with a ice pick sticking out of its head.Evolution at its worst.

  31. And for our next trick... by Arramol · · Score: 1

    ...the soldier that never runs from battle. "Engineers funded by the US military have created a neural implant designed to enable a shark's brain signals to be manipulated remotely, controlling the animal's movements"

    Seriously, this is some freaky technology. Oh, and I can't wait to see the reaction from PETA.

  32. Theoretically... by mliikset · · Score: 1

    ...since war is a last effort thing, any action is justified. In reality, though...

  33. Yada yada, laser beams, yada yada by demonbug · · Score: 0, Redundant

    "Umm, why does that shark have frickin laser beams on it's head?"

    "For scale, you idiot!"

    Can't have our RPS(wflb)'s* eyes too big for their stomachs, now can we?

    * Remotely Piloted Shark (with frickin laser beams)

  34. The over/under on "fricken lasers..." by SensitiveMale · · Score: 0, Troll

    "attached to their heads" jokes is 20.

    1. Re:The over/under on "fricken lasers..." by essell · · Score: 1

      I'll take $1000 on over!

      --
      i swear my userid used to be lower.
  35. Oh Dear by barefootgenius · · Score: 1

    Its really gonna piss them off when the poor bastards get netted, fins removed and thrown back in. http://www.thailandlife.com/sharkfinsoup.html

    --
    /. bug #926803 - Why I can post.
  36. Re:Lasers... (Day of the Dolphin) by thedletterman · · Score: 1

    The Navy has been training dolphins for years. Remote controlled sharks?? Seriously, can we get some freaking lasers installed on their heads?

    --
    Any fool can criticise, condemn, and complain, and most fools do. - Benjamin Franklin
  37. Freakin lasers? by ecorona · · Score: 0, Redundant

    But do they have freakin' lasers on mounted on their heads?

  38. Battle of all battles? by aaron_ds · · Score: 1

    Perhaps we will get to see the ultimate showdown: Military Sharks vs. Armed Dolphins.

    What sea-life won't the pentagon arm?!

    1. Re:Battle of all battles? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Octopi. They're already too well armed ;)

  39. How Science is Cool by toby34a · · Score: 1

    Man, PETA's gonna have a field day with this one. However, it shows just how cool science can be. To actually be able to manipulate the mind of a shark for military purpose... instead of just to see what it does- it's kinda scary, however, it's also kinda useful. New movie idea... the world of the future... where man does not fight, but uses it's mind-controlled shark bombers (with or without laser beams) to nuke the new commies... whomever the new commies would be (prob the French) What fun.

  40. Cool and all, but... by Philnet.HFZ · · Score: 1

    The real question is, will these shark-mind control devices run Linux?

    --
    I don't get why posts are limited to 120 characters. Seems unreasonable to me. I mean, just because I like having a real
    1. Re:Cool and all, but... by tilde_e · · Score: 1

      The mind control devices must be some kind of BIOS interface... so a better question is "will these *sharks* run Linux?"

      Stronger, can we extend this to penguins? They're amphibious!

  41. How about.. by Israfels · · Score: 1

    A Beowulf School of sharks?...

  42. This is what I want as an american. by Eric_Cartman_South_P · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As an American, I don't want lower taxes, better public transportation, or *gasp* national health care. No, I want to connect to sharks with VNC. What a fucking country.

    1. Re:This is what I want as an american. by freedom_india · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      No wonder you have not been modded as insightful.

      Can't you understand that fighting terror is more important than your public transportation (which would harm campaign contributors like Ford, GM), better healthcare (harm for-profit hospitals)?

      I guess next you would want *gasp* the patriot act to be REPEALED???

      --
      "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
    2. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1
      Everyone with their national healthcare, as if it's some, so to speak, magical cure to what ails us. Fuck that.

      Stealth sharks fricken' rock. :-) Gimme more of those.

    3. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Eightyford · · Score: 1

      Everyone with their national healthcare, as if it's some, so to speak, magical cure to what ails us. Fuck that.

      It's better than what americans have now.

    4. Re:This is what I want as an american. by DSL-Admin · · Score: 1

      Wow. Please don't bring up that garbage...

      1st. Not everyone in America is convinced there's a real concern about Terror. Terrorism has always been around, so it's nothing new. Sadam and Osama aren't doing anything that hasn't been done by people of the past.

      2nd. Maybe, just maybe, if the US would keep it's ideas out of everyone elses world, we wouldn't be protested so much. Just because the US has a certain view, doesn't mean it's the correct and only one that the rest of the world should follow.

      3rd. G.W. isn't exactly liked by his own people right now. Most of the people that voted for him don't even like him and I suspect that most of the soldiers are just respectful because of their code of conduct towards the CNC.

      --Anyways, it's a little stupid to enslave an animal to fight a political war. I agree with the original poster. The time and effort would be much better off in the hands of non-destructive people. Rememeber, we can just "listen in on phone calls" now anyways.

            --oh, and The Patriot Act is a joke, try actually looking in to the things that it's allowed that are in clear violation of everything this country was founded on.

      Don't forget that the founders left a country because of the same crap our current leaders are doing. It's sad that it's only take this short while for all of them to forget that.

    5. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Anubis350 · · Score: 1

      I believe the GP was using what is sometimes known as Sarcasm, though it could have also been seen as Irony, depending on the tone you read it in... :-P

      --
      "goodbye and hello, as always" ~Prince Corwin, from Zelazny's Amber series
    6. Re:This is what I want as an american. by master_p · · Score: 1

      Maybe if the shark had a lazer mounted in its forehead??? :-)

    7. Re:This is what I want as an american. by caudron · · Score: 1

      I don't want lower taxes, better public transportation, or *gasp* national health care. No, I want to connect to sharks with VNC.

      I get your point, and I don't entirely disagree, but it's worth pointing out that you gain a HUGE personal benefit from our country's predilection for defense spending. To be blunt, whether you are a peacenik or a warhawk, the fact that you live in the hands-down most powerful country on the planet has amazing advantages. I'm not saying I'm proud of what we do all the time (*cough*Iraq*cough*) but I'm not going to dismiss the direct personal benefits of being a citizen of the /only/ global superpower.

      For good or bad, We have a lead that isn't going anywhere anytime soon...regardless of what you may have heard speculated elsewhere.

      --
      -Tom
    8. Re:This is what I want as an american. by db32 · · Score: 1

      Damned skippy! The taxes, public trans, and healthcare are part of the price you pay for being the only nation to have remote control stealth sharks! How can you possibly be upset with this!? Every evil geek dreams of something like this! STEALTH SHARKS! Come on man! How cool is that?!

      Maybe they could be used along our southeastern coastlines to help curb illegal immigration too! See, cost reduction for the tax payer. Free food for the sharks, less money lost to illegal immigrants not payin taxes on their illegal jobs, and less money spent on traditional enforcement of said immigration laws!

      --
      The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
    9. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Gulthek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What are these benefits that only we Americans get, exactly? I think I missed that day in civics.

    10. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Politburo · · Score: 1

      I don't want lower taxes, better public transportation, or *gasp* national health care.

      One of these things is not like the others,
      One of these things just doesn't belong,
      Can you tell which thing is not like the others
      By the time I finish my song?

    11. Re:This is what I want as an american. by caudron · · Score: 1

      What are these benefits that only we Americans get, exactly?

      I started answering this question as though you wanted one, then decided you probably don't. If you don't see the tangible benefits of being American then you are either too young to be able to understand or too far lost to the ideological left to want to understand. Sufficed to say, you should ask yourself why people are killing themselves every day for a chance to get into this country. They aren't stupid. They see something you seem unwilling to admit.

      I think I missed that day in civics.

      Don't be trite. I was trying to make a legitimate point. No one needs your sarcasm.

      And for the record, Civics isn't the class in which you'd learn about the benefits to American citizens of our unsurpassed defense department. You'd learn that in an American Foreign Policy class.

      Civics is where you'd learn the benefits of the Police and Fire Department to American citizens.

      --
      -Tom
    12. Re:This is what I want as an american. by jim_v2000 · · Score: 1

      "As an American, I don't want lower taxes, better public transportation, or *gasp* national health care. No, I want to connect to sharks with VNC. What a fucking country."

      Haha, you want "lower taxes" AND "national healthcare". HAHAHAA.
      Talk to the Canadians about how great national healthcare is...they love waiting 1-2 years for treatment.

      --
      Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
    13. Re:This is what I want as an american. by robgamble · · Score: 1

      Dude! Lasers don't work under water! Oh wait...

      --
      No sig for you!
    14. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      "As an American, I don't want lower taxes, better public transportation, or *gasp* national health care. No, I want to connect to sharks with VNC. What a fucking country"

      National health care is strongly opposed by the AMA, which is a more powerful lobbying entity than even the NRA.

      Anyway, those that would support national health care are thoroughly distracted by trying to tie it to the extremely controversial and unpleasant topic of endorsing homosexuality. Why should just fags get health benefits? Give them to everybody, thus saving costs. Besides going for national health care (not universal "coverage" or "insurance" but actual health care without the expensive middlemen) up front will get more support than trying to get it in the back door.

      You shouldn't have to take it up the ass to get health care, even in the US.

    15. Re:This is what I want as an american. by dfj225 · · Score: 1

      Personally, I'm in favor of the shark program. I imagine one day being able to use my 2400 baud modem to hack into the computer controlling them, being asked if I want to play a game of chess, answering no and opting instead for the really cool shark sim game, and unknowingly unleashing a remote controlled shark army on the world. Ah, the good days.

      --
      SIGFAULT
    16. Re:This is what I want as an american. by SSCGWLB · · Score: 1

      Dear Troll,

      As an American, I also want lower taxes and better public transportation but you can keep the national health care. Why should my hard earned tax dollars be wasted on financing someone else's bad health? Maybe if they have to foot the bill people will eat and smoke less and exercise more... In addition, national health care costs money, money that will be raised by increasing taxes. So, you can pick #1 or #3, personally I like #1. This is, however, beside the point. We are discussing sharks, with freakin' laser beams. Personally, I hope they put a lowlight camera on those sharks and let us watch (or control!!) what they are doing... Go technology!

      ~nate

    17. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It's better than what americans have now.

      See, that's ideological thinking. You assume some sort of magical system will be put into place and it'll all work well. You assume a system which has not even been designed yet will work better. How can you have any basis for that conclusion?

      The simple fact of matters is that our system isn't as bad as people make it out to be, and the nationalized systems are not as good as those same people make those out to be.

    18. Re:This is what I want as an american. by niXcamiC · · Score: 1

      Ok, you are right on the fact that you can't have both, but really, for most stuff there is little or no wait, and after living in a country without national healthcare for a fiew years, you do start to realize that even with its flaws, it is a good thing.

      --
      Chances are any disscution on Slashdot will degrade into a flamewar about ID/Christianity within 14 posts.
    19. Re:This is what I want as an american. by niXcamiC · · Score: 1

      As someone else who actualy does want an answer, could you give me one?

      --
      Chances are any disscution on Slashdot will degrade into a flamewar about ID/Christianity within 14 posts.
    20. Re:This is what I want as an american. by hutchike · · Score: 2, Funny

      Imagine there's no heaven,
      It's easy if you try,
      No hell below us,
      Above us only sky,
      Imagine all the people
      living for today...

      Imagine there's no countries,
      It isn't hard to do,
      Nothing to kill or die for,
      No religion too,
      Imagine all the people
      living life in peace...

      Imagine no possesions,
      I wonder if you can,
      No need for greed or hunger,
      A brotherhood of man,
      Imagine all the people
      Sharing all the world...

      You may say I'm a dreamer,
      but I'm not the only one,
      I hope some day you'll join us,
      And the world will live as one.

      --
      Zen tips: Pay attention. Don't take it personally. Believe nothing.
    21. Re:This is what I want as an american. by TheWickedKingJeremy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Talk to the Canadians about how great national healthcare is...they love waiting 1-2 years for treatment.

      Is that what Bill O'Reilly told you they do?

      Look at the facts... Canada has a higher life expectancy (which is also rising at a faster rate) and lower infant mortality rate than the United States does. The United States has 40 million people without healthcare, and yet Americans spend a higher percentage of their income for healthcare than the Canadians do (because their system is so much more efficient than ours). Also, studies have shown that care received on both sides is more or less equal (assuming you have healtchare if you are American)...

      There are problems with Canada's system, no doubt, and yes I have read about the occasional horror story of Person X waiting Y time for Z procedure. But you could cherry-pick a horror story from here in the U.S. as well. That is not a good way to judge the merits and problems with a healthcare system as a whole. Look at the big picture... we spend more, for less. Simple as that.

      --

      my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
    22. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Gulthek · · Score: 1

      Yes. Civics is where you learn the benefits that we have as citizens. What benefits do we have that other countries don't?

      Although trite, I seriously do want an answer for what you think we have that other developed countries don't. It's as if you think that we're the ONLY country with an immigration problem. (We aren't.)

      I really do want an answer and I'm especially interested in a comparison to western European countries.

    23. Re:This is what I want as an american. by svelgen · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Further stats from a recent Economist article. The US is up to 16% of
      its GDP spent on health care in 2004 (more if you count the tax break
      US firms get for offering health care coverage to their employees).
      Canada spends just under 10% of its GDP on health care and gets better
      health outcomes (e.g. longevity). Of that 16% of GDP in the US, the
      government picks up over 6% for the elderly, poor and veterans (and pays
      inflated prices set by the "for profit" sector).

      Health care inflation outstrips the general inflation figure in almost
      all advanced countries. So every nation has a problem, the US just has
      a relatively bigger one.

      The US's neighbours and friends can sleep a little sounder at night
      knowing that if the US had an efficient health care system, it would
      have 6% more of its GDP to spend on foreign adventures.

      BTW There has been a spike in shark attacks on Australian beaches this
      summer. Could there be a connection?

    24. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fuck off, troll. Try actually pointing out a benefit held by a United States citizen that was not held while the USSR provided a much-needed balance of power.

    25. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Syncdata · · Score: 1

      If I had mod points sir, that would be an insightful.

      --
      "Inattention makes clowns of us all" -Bean
    26. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      or better yet - he could point out the benefit that a soviet citizen must have enjoyed, when the ussr was that 800 pound gorilla. following his logic...

      oh well, he's probably just being modest about his huge, tangible, rock-hard, personal benefits and doesn't want to brag about it.

      too bad he lives in a F*R*E*E*(TM) country - otherwise we could *make* him explain :)

    27. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, instead I prefer not getting any healthcare at all. No waiting!

    28. Re:This is what I want as an american. by jim_v2000 · · Score: 1

      I really dislike the idea of national healthcare. I don't trust the govt to manage something that important. I think a better idea would be govt (state or federal) mandated limits to how much various medical procedures can cost. Also, limiting the max awards (mostly punitive) on malpractice suits would help too.

      --
      Don't take life so seriously. No one makes it out alive.
    29. Re:This is what I want as an american. by TheWickedKingJeremy · · Score: 1

      Not true. A simple change in priorities is all that is required.

      Case in point: In most years only around 1% of the federal transportation budget is allocated for rail. That looks to me like a country that simply isn't interested in rail infrastructure investment...

      The money is there. It's how we use it sometimes that is unfortunate.

      --

      my religion lies somewhere between buddhism and super monkey ball - pamphlet?
    30. Re:This is what I want as an american. by badmammajamma · · Score: 1

      There are no superpowers. We barely have enough military to deal with Iraq. Sure we can nuke the shit out of everything but that fucks us too. Economically we're still pretty strong but that's weakening as we go on. Asia is rising. It will be there time (again) in the sun soon. However, if we can pull off this shark thing and especially if we can get lasers on their freakin' heads, then we will still be a superpower afterall.

      Of course, it makes me wonder if Bush is actually Dr. Evil but that's for another discussion...

      --
      Any man who afflicts the human race with ideas must be prepared to see them misunderstood. -- H. L. Mencken
    31. Re:This is what I want as an american. by caudron · · Score: 1

      I really do want an answer and I'm especially interested in a comparison to western European countries.

      As the nation that holds the uncontested top position of military might on this planet, we enjoy certain benefits that come with it.

      Specifically, we are not now and not likely in my lifetime going to need to fear enemy combatants (which is one of the reasons I see this "Do out of fear of terrorists" thing as a sham and a crock!). We simply will not ever see a Red Dawn scenario in this country. Given our current lead and the rate at which we are improving our lead, there isn't a nation on this planet that can challenge us.

      Now how does this bring tangible benefits to us as citizens? I think that part of the problem here is that when I say "benefits" I get the impression you are hearing "rights" when what I mean is "priviledge". Let me explain.

      Our scientific and technology lead isn't going anywhere. I explain this in more detail elsewhere. Moreover, much of our technology and science is spent on increasing our military might. Now, while I agree with the original poster that I'd like to see more spent on social issue than is currently spent, I don't think that our military spending is without benefit to me.

      To put it in the basest terms, only people who haven't lost don't see the benefit of always winning. In scholl were you the biggest, toughest kid? I wasn't. What does that mean? It means negotiating from a position of subordination in all things. It means not having the power to say "fuck it" and take what you need. This is a power that the biggest, toughest kid in school had. It's the power we have in the US. That's not to say it isn't stupid, unfair, and wrong (it's all those things and more) but it's true. We have the ability to negotiate from the postion of power in every situation. In so far as we court the world's opinion it's just to make ourselves feel better about our final decision. Don't beleive me? Look at Iraq. We didn't need to ask anyone. We asked, and when they all said no, we said too bad. In that case, our power was abused without benefit to us (sadly without much penalty either in the bigger picture...which kinda sucks, I think). But our position of absolute authority is used to our advantage daily all over the world. We get better trade deals, better treatment, better everything than everyone else. Sure Britain and Germany aren't hurting, but they also know that they aren't the biggest kids in school. Any negotion they enter into with us is done from a position of weakness. Given that the majority of Brits disagreed with th eWar in Iraq, why do you think the Blair agreed to join us? It incurred our favor. The fucked up reality is that Britian sucked up the the school bully and in the real world the bully gets his way and you can either join him or always fear that he'll turn on you. Note that this is also why, for all their "The war is wrong" rhetoric, it's now coming out that behind the scenes the Germans fed us intelligence to help our ground troops. Worlkd leaders, especially those of developed nations like in Western Europe, are ultimately pragmatists not idealists. When you hear them making an idealists' stance, know that you are being lied to. Sorry. Germany wanted to side with us without pissing off their own citizenry so that's how they played it. It won't be the ladt such story we hear coming out about the so-called objectors. I'm an objector too, but I understand why they helped us, even if privately. They don't want to piss off the school bully, because you never know when he'll turn on you.

      Think I'm being too bleak and pessimistic about how the world works? Just remember that from the dawn of time it has been the guys with the sharpest swords and the biggest barrels that decided what was done and when. We've moved into a world were we are that guy, and the link I included above explains why it won't be easy to put us out

      --
      -Tom
    32. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Politburo · · Score: 1

      I know the ideas arent exactly mutually exclusive.. but my reply was more fun.

    33. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Politburo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't trust the govt to manage something that important

      Well, I don't trust corporations to manage something that important. Looks like we have a problem. Also, you don't trust the government with health care.. what about the military and other national security matters?

      Also, limiting the max awards (mostly punitive) on malpractice suits would help too.

      Nope. Where caps were put in place, there was no positive effect on the cost of malpractice insurance or medical care in general.

      "In states with caps, the median annual premium went up by 48.2%, but, surprisingly, in states without caps, the median annual premium increased at a slower clip--by 35.9%."

      "Do caps on medical malpractice damage awards hold down doctors' liability insurance premiums? The nation's largest medical malpractice insurer says they don't."

    34. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Eightyford · · Score: 1

      See, that's ideological thinking. You assume some sort of magical system will be put into place and it'll all work well. You assume a system which has not even been designed yet will work better. How can you have any basis for that conclusion?

      I live in Canada.

      The simple fact of matters is that our system isn't as bad as people make it out to be, and the nationalized systems are not as good as those same people make those out to be.

      I don't think anyone will claim that national healthcare is perfect. Just better in theory and most likely better in practice. Wouldn't you rather have the people own the healthcare system and not the insurance companies, lawyers, and drug industry?

    35. Re:This is what I want as an american. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Canada spends just under 10% of its GDP on health care and gets better health outcomes (e.g. longevity).

      I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I do feel compelled to say that duration of life means precisely jack shit. It's quality of life that matters. I'd rather be healthy up until getting killed by being hit by a truck at the age of 50 than have my life somehow degraded at the age of 40 and live out my life until the age of a hundred and two uncontrollably pooping in a baggie.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    36. Re:This is what I want as an american. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      "Do caps on medical malpractice damage awards hold down doctors' liability insurance premiums? The nation's largest medical malpractice insurer says they don't."

      Uh.

      "Did the administration really think there were WMDs in Iraq? The administration says there was."

      Hope this puts things in perspective for you.

      Caps reduce maximum expenses. If the insurance companies refuse to take this into account (their formulae are SOOPER SEKRIT and thus there is no way to know what the fuck they're doing to the numbers) then the cost of insurance will not drop.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    37. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Politburo · · Score: 1

      Look, there's a lot of info out there about how caps don't work. I pasted but two sentences. If you don't want to believe me, take a look for yourself.

    38. Re:This is what I want as an american. by Gulthek · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but this doesn't hold any water. I think you've taken the experience you had in grade school and inappropriately projected it into international affairs.

      The ones with the sharpest swords and biggest guns aren't the ones in power, the ones who control the people with the sharpest swords and biggest guns are in power.

      A false perception of power breeds complacency and overconfidence. Just look at China before the Opium War. They explored the world with *vast* fleets of ships. One mission that discovered and made trading contact with Persia consisted of over two hundred ships, each of which dwarfed Columbus' three, well before 1492. But they discovered that the rest of the world just wasn't all that interesting compared to their power (and it genuinely wasn't). They were the top dog so who cares what the rest of the world does or thinks?

      So unknown to them the western powers grew in strength and ability. When there was finally a confrontation China was absolutely crushed.

      So are we *that* oblivious to the world? You would say, no; but then consider your example of Iraq. Most reasonable, intelligent people knew how a land war in Iraq was going to go (I recall the word "quagmire" being used extensively in our conversations); but we, as a country, went anyway. Blind to the ineffectiveness of our might.

      We are a powerful country, but *only* when dealing with countries. Against nationless groups we are not only hindered, we are almost absolutely powerless. Our leaders thought that by attacking the countries that these groups were in, we would create an hostile environment that would drive them out or crush them from within. Instead we walked into the nest of vipers and started recklessly stepping on them.

      Now you say that we as a people are safe from outside attack due to our military might. I agree that we are safe, but it's because of our geographic location rather than our military. The *only* way for another nation to attack us would be with an intercontinental missile (or to be Mexico or Canada). Even with a barrage of missiles, we wouldn't be defeated but merely inconvenienced (as a nation). Until transporter technology allows entire armies to zip around the globe instantly, we will never be conquered. Most of our defense spending is actually offense spending, and is largely superfluous unless you want to be the police for the rest of the world.

      We don't have the power to do whatever we want. Our military is stretched so thin that we simply can't invade another country or adequately perform peacekeeping activities OR keep the ranks filled. Have you noticed the consistently dropping military application standards? As a military nation, our power is bleeding away and eventually the vultures will be circling; ready to pick off pieces one by one.

      Ex: China will want to incorporate Taiwan. We'll bluster and stammer but, thanks to our impotence in Iraq, will ultimately have little to say about the matter. It's hard to talk about military might when we our supposely indefeatable military is demonstrated on a daily basis to be anything but.

      No empire lasts, the longest empires are built on diplomacy (Rome, China), the shortest are built on military might (Alexander the Great, Ghengis Khan). If you think that our military might is enough to make that fact irrelevant you might need to study your world history more.

      As a nation we are barely two hundred years old. As a strong world power we are barely fifty. How much longer do you think we can keep it going? Don't you see the cracks in our system and our power? I hope you don't, and I hope that you don't ever have to. I hope that we grow out of our military focus and our crippling reliance on oil. I hope that we mend the diplomatic bridges that we've burned all over the world. But historical precedent doesn't make that hope a safe bet.

    39. Re:This is what I want as an american. by caudron · · Score: 1

      I think you've taken the experience you had in grade school and inappropriately projected it into international affairs.

      To be clear, I was trying to find an example that resonate with the slashdot crowd. I didn't have problems with 'bullies' in school for a number of reasons I won't go into here. My opinions about international affairs were created in college a few years back by studying the relevant topics...also by vitrue of the fact that the professors who taught such classes were all pretty much in agreement that coercion rules the roost in international affairs.

      The ones with the sharpest swords and biggest guns aren't the ones in power, the ones who control the people with the sharpest swords and biggest guns are in power.

      Not sure how this really changes my point, but OK. That's a fine enough distinction. Not really making a difference, though. It's the weapons that make the difference in power, not enlightenment or likeability. If you control the biggest weapons, you control the situation. In so far as others get a say it's only in that you are willing to allow it by virtue of not exercising your miitary power. Read "The Irony of American History" for better coverage on the concept of coercion in international affairs.

      When there was finally a confrontation China was absolutely crushed.

      And that teaches us that military poweer is paramount, which is what I've been saying.

      Most reasonable, intelligent people knew how a land war in Iraq was going to go (I recall the word "quagmire" being used extensively in our conversations); but we, as a country, went anyway. Blind to the ineffectiveness of our might.

      Most intelligent people then and now know that the war in Iraq is going poorly because we aren't their the destroy them but to colonize them. Very different objectives. If we were there to destroy them, it would have been a 2 week war with nearly zero casualities on our side. To convert them to democracy and make them our friends? That was a wasteful use of our military. If we'd wanted them to change their way of life, that's what we have propaganda and hidden insurgencies for. I'm not advocating either of those things, but pointing out the odd mistake made. Indeed, there's some evidence to suggest it wasnt' a mistake (in that we seem to be making all the "mistakes" necessary to see Iraq and the Middle East hang itself...I won't get into how that suits our needs in a machivellian sense, it's just too messed up to think about right now).

      We are a powerful country, but *only* when dealing with countries. Against nationless groups we are not only hindered, we are almost absolutely powerless. Our leaders thought that by attacking the countries that these groups were in, we would create an hostile environment that would drive them out or crush them from within. Instead we walked into the nest of vipers and started recklessly stepping on them.

      You are taking a lot on face value regarding our motives in those countries. I'll leave it at that.

      Now you say that we as a people are safe from outside attack due to our military might. I agree that we are safe, but it's because of our geographic location rather than our military.

      Til now, I disagreed with you, but saw the logic of your point. This one, though, is a bit out there. Seriously. We are secure because we have a military that is so far beyind what anyone else has as to be nearly fantastical. Our geographic benefits gave us the freedom to create that military unmolested, but isn't even close to the our most important asset militarily. If I had to give up our miltary might or our geographic position, the geography would go in a heartbeat. Really, you'd trade our ICBMs and F18s for essentially a large moat? Hell no. Canada is in the same geographic position and the fact is, they are stuck depending on us and England to offer protection. If, during the 60s, the USSR had wanted Canada, they'd have had it except for our

      --
      -Tom
  43. um by macsox · · Score: 1

    maybe we should start by trying to create human stealth spies, eh, miss plame?

  44. Giving hollywood DRM ideas? by plasmacutter · · Score: 1

    Seriously.. "hollywood is able to guide pirates to the straight and narrow thanks to a neural implant in customer's brains"

    This news just brings ghost in the shell to mind, where neural implants are expensive but normal, and it's not unusual for someone to HACK YOUR BRAIN!

    To venture completely off topic and muse on the concept of neural implants---I don't care if jobs and linus breed the ultimate team of programmers in a eugenics program, I won't trust a chip in my head.

    --
    VLC FOR MAC IS DYING! IF YOU DEVELOP, PLEASE SAVE IT!!
  45. Vacation for Osama by themadplasterer · · Score: 1

    Now if only Osama would get out of landlocked Afghanistan and frolic in an oceam somewhere

  46. My new aquarium by Tau_Xi · · Score: 1

    Ok, so if I get an aquarium full of these "stealth sharks", will I be able to watch them swim? Or will the fish I put in there just dissapear??

  47. As bizarre as it sounds ... by njchick · · Score: 2, Funny

    my gut feeling is telling me that Pentagon is more likely to succeed at making zombie sharks than NASA at launching three more shuttles this year.

  48. Obligatory rimshot jokes.. by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    I suppose if the shark has a friggin laser turret on its head and it gets hungry, we'll have to update the meaning of "fish fry"...

    And, if the shark gets to THRASHIN' round and round while the beam's active, we could update the meaning of "fish n' chips"...

    Now, if the FRENCH get in on this stupefying, hare-brained military idea, and THEIR shark tags your ass, you'd be "French Fried"...

    But, the lameos in congress (the opposite of PROgress) will get an executive order signed to rename US laser kills as "Freedom Fries".

    Well, when the sharks end up fighting each other cuz their FRIGGIN lazer beams keep fryin' up all the fish, then the sharks can REALLY get into Freedom Fries... fryin' each other.

    AND, if these big fish do their thing in Catskills or Fishkill, it'll get even MORE interesting...

    OK, I'm fried...

    Hehehe... image word: dreaded

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  49. Dophins would be a lot better. by eamonman · · Score: 1

    They'd give us advance notice of impending Earth destruction, while the sharks would simply keep chewing on tourists and sucking down chum from the latest Discovery Channel's Shark Week produced extravaganzas.

    --
    0- Eamonman Proud member of DNRC
  50. Candygram... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Enemy of US: Who is it?

    Stealth Shark: Flowers.

    Enemy of US: Flowers? From whom?

    Stealth Shark: Plumber.

    Enemy of US: I don't need a plumber. You're that stealth shark, aren't you?

    Stealth Shark: Candygram.

    Enemy of US: Candygram, my foot! Get out of here before I call the proper authorities. You're the stealth shark, and you know it.

    Stealth Shark: I'm only a dolphin.

    Enemy of US: A dolphin? Well.. okay.. AHHHH AHHHH AHHHHHHHHH!!!!!

  51. Obligatory fisherman analogs.. by davidsyes · · Score: 1

    Joke used to be if you were an expert fisherman, you were a master baiter.

    Now, when these sharks get equipped with lasers and get really good at laser tag, who'll be the master baiter? The human that trained them, or the shark? Or, the generals strokin up and down the deep corridors of the pentuhgun?

    --
    Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
  52. Yeah But... by Doomedsnowball · · Score: 1

    We've already proven that tinfoil hats won't help the sharks fight the government mind control radio waves. They're totally screwed. Poor sharks.

    Although, I wonder if shark bite victims can sue the government? Huh, interesting.

    --
    7h3$3 4r3n'7 7h3 Ðr01Ð$ ¥0 4r3 £00|{1n9 f0r. M0v3 4£0n9. --OB1
  53. boys will be boys by psycho+chic · · Score: 1

    I find this article rather creepy, only for the fact that it shows what desperate measures people have come to. On the other hand, a scientist playing with a sharks mind is sort of like a man playing with his ferarri isnt it? I'm just waiting for the day science wants to tackle the minds of something more important then fish.

    1. Re:boys will be boys by susano_otter · · Score: 1

      I'm just waiting for the day science wants to tackle the minds of something more important then fish.

      I think Sigmund Freud owes you a face-stab.

      --

      Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  54. Not worthy of mod points by arrrrg · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Apparently the mods have insightfully given this thread up to the "laser beam" jokes. After almost 90 comments and 1.5 hours, it looks like only 2 mod points have been expended so far.

  55. You have to give them credit when it's due by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1
    Stealth sharks are the fraking coolest idea I've heard in 2006 so far.

    God bless the military industrial complex. :-)

    That almost beats the radio control planes accessorized with Hellfire missiles.

    Now where is that power armor already? We're waiting, Pentagon!

  56. Give me a break!!! by Nonillion · · Score: 1

    I guess it's just beyond most human beings intellectual capacity to just get a fucking clue. This ranks right up there with the rest of the dumb fucking things our military does with innocent animals. I could go on endlessly about the things humans do to animals, but then, most of you out there would label me as some wacko animal rights terrorist.

    It's beyond bad enough the industrial farming institutions have most people brain washed to believe that eating animals and animal products is "good" for you. When I kick the bucket, I sincerely hope I'm not judged by what the rest of the human race does to animals.

    --
    "I bow to no man" - Riddick
    1. Re:Give me a break!!! by johnMG · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I guess it's just beyond most human beings intellectual capacity to just get a fucking clue. This ranks right up there with the rest of the dumb fucking things our military does with innocent animals.

      It's not *just* that people are dumb. They are. But they also don't *want* to know what they do to animals (or causes others to do to animals on their behalf).

      For example, offer to show someone a short video of what goes on in an abattoir. Almost guaranteed they will refuse. Tell them you don't think eating meat is wrong -- you just want them to see what goes on for them to be able to eat that McBurger. See if they'd be willing (not even "curious", just *willing*) to see how the fowl are slaughtered. They won't do it -- they will almost always prefer ignorance, and they'll probably also get mad at you for "trying to ruin their day".

    2. Re:Give me a break!!! by Nonillion · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I guess it's just beyond most human beings intellectual capacity to just get a fucking clue. This ranks right up there with the rest of the dumb fucking things our military does with innocent animals.
      It's not *just* that people are dumb. They are. But they also don't *want* to know what they do to animals (or causes others to do to animals on their behalf).
      For example, offer to show someone a short video of what goes on in an abattoir. Almost guaranteed they will refuse. Tell them you don't think eating meat is wrong -- you just want them to see what goes on for them to be able to eat that McBurger. See if they'd be willing (not even "curious", just *willing*) to see how the fowl are slaughtered. They won't do it -- they will almost always prefer ignorance, and they'll probably also get mad at you for "trying to ruin their day".

      I agree, 100%. You know, I used to eat animals, I was the kind of guy who would smack his fist down on the table and say "I got to have my slab of dead cow!" But, all that changed forever when I watched an undercover video showing some of the most deplorable acts violence committed against an innocent sow on a pig farm in North Carolina. These guys were yelling and screaming expletives at her, beating her with pipe wrenches and gate rods, sexually molesting her with a steel rod. And then to add insult to injury, smashed her over the head with a cinder block, it was then they started to skin and dismember her while she was still alive. It was the most disgusting thing I ever saw, it was extremely painful to watch. Chickens are treated even worse, and cows fair no better than pigs. And as for China, dogs are routinely strung up by their hind legs and beaten to death, cats are callously tossed into vats of scalding hot water while fully conscious.

      So I make no excuse for my disdain towards my fellow human beings let alone what our own fucking government does to animals.

      --
      "I bow to no man" - Riddick
    3. Re:Give me a break!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to be a vegetarian, but then I realized that in the wild, animals are eaten while they are still alive, and I realized that even though I know that cruelty is done to animals who are raised to be eaten, I can still eat hamburger and fish and chicken with little or no remorse. Animals are killed all the time by farming equipment, which is used to get all those plants that vegetarians and vegans love to eat, and the only way to totally be free of any 'taint' of animal blood and death is to live on your own in the wilderness and grow your own food or gather it from the surrounding environment.

    4. Re:Give me a break!!! by Compuser · · Score: 1

      You know, I like meat. And so to be true to
      myself I did in the past watch videos from
      slaughterhouses to see if my mind would change.
      Nope. I do sometimes get hungry watching
      birds and cows getting killed. I remember
      having this argument with a coworker of mine
      who was a kind of PETA nutjob. I used to
      tease him for weeks with a jesture of
      smacking a chicken against a wall.
      This circa two years ago so it is
      unlikely that my vews have changed or the
      video test got old.
      BTW, cruelty to animals usually makes the
      resulting meat taste worse. Best farms
      kill animals fast, along the lines of
      steel rod fired into skull all of a sudden or a guillotine.

    5. Re:Give me a break!!! by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1
      Yeah - it really stinks that humans have started using animals for war purposes.

      I heard about this new innovation that the Pentagon is trying. The "armed man on a horse" concept is expected to give greater speed to U.S. troops, while greatly extending the range of patrols. Army spokesmen are salivating at the concept.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    6. Re:Give me a break!!! by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 2, Funny

      Preach it brother, preach it. But it's not just animals.

      You know - I used to eat fruits, vegetables and the likes. Then one day I saw how people treat these living things. Cutting into them with knives, killing their offspring right next to them, eating their offspring before the plants themselves have even let go of them. Some would even abuse them sexually, I kid you not.

      So now I'm on day 17 of my refusal to not only eat anything from an animal, but also anything from a plant. So far it's going okay. I've lost a lot of weight, but that's obviously because of all the excess calories I got from eating animals and plants. Kinda feeling tired most of the time too, but I think that's becuse the animals and plants I ate made my body addicted to something. I just have to be strong and let it pass. Cold turkey! (No offence to the bird, of course)

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    7. Re:Give me a break!!! by dougTheRug · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Let's watch a movie of my baby being born. Hey wait, where are you going?

    8. Re:Give me a break!!! by EvanED · · Score: 1

      "I've heard the screams of the vegetables, (scream scream scream)
      Watching their skins being peeled, (having their insides revealed)
      Grated and steamed with no mercy, (burning off calories)
      How do you think that feels, (bet it hurts really bad)
      Carrot juice constitutes murder, (and that's a real crime)
      Greenhouses prisons for slaves, (let my vegetables grow)
      It's time to stop all this gardening, (it's dirty as hell below)
      Let's call a spade a spade, (it's a spade it's a spade it's a spade)"

    9. Re:Give me a break!!! by swillden · · Score: 1

      For example, offer to show someone a short video of what goes on in an abattoir. Almost guaranteed they will refuse. Tell them you don't think eating meat is wrong -- you just want them to see what goes on for them to be able to eat that McBurger. See if they'd be willing (not even "curious", just *willing*) to see how the fowl are slaughtered.

      Video, pah... I think everyone who eats meat should be required to actually kill, clean and cook an animal, at least once, with their own hands. It'd probably turn some segment of the population vegetarian, and it'd knock the silly squeamishness out of the rest.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    10. Re:Give me a break!!! by CagedBear · · Score: 1

      I think everyone who eats meat should be required to actually kill, clean and cook an animal, at least once, with their own hands.

      Been there, done that. Tasted goooooood. And I agree, they should.

      In fact, if I had enough money and free time I would only eat animals that I killed myself. Unfortunatly I'm not a very good hunter and it's awfully tough to hold down a full time IT job and run a farm at the same time.

    11. Re:Give me a break!!! by Corbets · · Score: 1

      Man, you've got issues. There's nothing inherently immoral about killing or using animals - they are not people, for crying out loud. If you're worried about them feeling pain, then make sure you don't swat a fly or kill a mosquito that bites you. But why stop there? Aren't all forms of life special? Then make sure you don't buy flowers for your girlfriend (on the off chance that a Slashdotter actually has one) or step on a blade of grass, since you might damage it!

      Yes, some of the things people do to animals are disgusting. I don't see a point in gratuitous violence against anything. All the same, I don't have any problems whatsoever in shooting Bambi and making sausage out of her. I'm hungry (and yes, I've seen butchering done before). Go try to push your morals and ethics off on someone else.

    12. Re:Give me a break!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing inherently immoral about killing or using animals - they are not people, for crying out loud. . . . Go try to push your morals and ethics off on someone else.

      You're making moral judgements and pushing them on others as well. What's so immoral about killing people? They're animals, after all.

    13. Re:Give me a break!!! by Alioth · · Score: 0

      Watch a video on an abbatoir? I've helped round up lambs into the van, and then *taken* them to the abbatoir. A proper abbatoir will kill fast because a panicked, fearful animal will taste worse when butchered. You want a fast kill.

    14. Re:Give me a break!!! by advocate_one · · Score: 1
      But, all that changed forever when I watched an undercover video showing some of the most deplorable acts violence committed against an innocent sow on a pig farm in North Carolina. These guys were yelling and screaming expletives at her, beating her with pipe wrenches and gate rods, sexually molesting her with a steel rod. And then to add insult to injury, smashed her over the head with a cinder block, it was then they started to skin and dismember her while she was still alive.

      that was some redneck assholes in North Carolina... a few sick individuals... DO NOT ATTEMPT TO TAR ALL SLAUGHTERHOUSE EMPLOYEES WITH THIS BRUSH...

      And as for China, dogs are routinely strung up by their hind legs and beaten to death, cats are callously tossed into vats of scalding hot water while fully conscious.

      and that's the Chinese... they have a completely different set of morals to us... they don't see anything wrong in what they're doing, and if you're upset, then you should protest to them, NOT US... there are some Chinese who don't like it, and it's up to YOU to assist them in trying to change the ways of their fellow countrymen...

      --
      Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
    15. Re:Give me a break!!! by Orangejesus · · Score: 1

      [quote]It's not *just* that people are dumb. They are. But they also don't *want* to know what they do to animals (or causes others to do to animals on their behalf). For example, offer to show someone a short video of what goes on in an abattoir. Almost guaranteed they will refuse. Tell them you don't think eating meat is wrong -- you just want them to see what goes on for them to be able to eat that McBurger. See if they'd be willing (not even "curious", just *willing*) to see how the fowl are slaughtered. They won't do it -- they will almost always prefer ignorance, and they'll probably also get mad at you for "trying to ruin their day".[/quote] How did this get modded up? Ask people to watch a short video about what goes on in a hospital surgery room. most won't want to watch that either. I guess hospitals must be evil too huh? Ever stopped to think that maybe it's just gross? By the way, just because you saw some propoganda video of three guys beating a pig, doesn't mean thats what normally happens. Think about it for 5 seconds. They kill the animals swiftly and efficently to process them. Chances are those guys in the video you saw if nothing else would get in trouble for wasteing time and making a mess.

    16. Re:Give me a break!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      WTF man, are you trying to ruin my day?

    17. Re:Give me a break!!! by sgtrock · · Score: 1

      Amen, hallelujah!

    18. Re:Give me a break!!! by Cyno · · Score: 1

      I like watching cute little animals get slaughtered. Its a nice change from the daily reports of suicide bombers in Iraq. If only they would show cute little children getting slaughtered, maybe then I wouldn't need to see the animals.

      I think people are animals. And I think all life on this planet will die, eventually, unless it becomes intelligent. I doubt we'll escape nature. Survival of the fittest, baby. Yer gunna die. /grinz/

      I just wish we'd stop being hypocritical and let me go carmageddon on your asses. Cowards. Why be affraid of anarchy? Its perfectly natural.

    19. Re:Give me a break!!! by mesocyclone · · Score: 1

      You are giving misanthropy a bad name.

      Please go back to your cave.

      --

      The only good weather is bad weather.

    20. Re:Give me a break!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This kind of behaviour is not reflective of what goes on in a professional slaughterhouse. I mean, do you know what the built cost of having several rednecks beat each animal to death is? It's just not economic to utilize rednecks to torture each animal to death when you can use a quicker method (like a humane killer) instead.

    21. Re:Give me a break!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      You can still eat meat on not feel this guilt:

      Years ago I slaughtered a goat. It wasn't easy, but I wanted to do it. As a noob, I unintentionally made it suffer because I hesitated due to squeamishness (and dizziness) when I cut its throat, not making a clean incision (and ending up with a screaming, bleeding goat shitting and pissing all over me). But it only lasted ~20 seconds. Overall, it was a very stinky, messy procedure that took a very long time. Furthermore, my cuts were poorly done and I ended up with splintered bone hidden in many places, so we all had to eat carefully.

      The point is: I did it. And I felt a very strong connection with the animal itself. I didn't feel bad about killing it, I felt very primal and preditory; it was a very intense feeling that I was doing it for survival (even though that wasn't true). I suppose my mind was inventing ways to justify death, and it did succeed in convincing me.

      I don't want to do it again, because it is easier to plunk down $150~$200 for a pro to do it in an hour (and returned nicely packaged parts)... it was tedious manual labor, like tilesetting or drywall.

      However, I feel I earned a shield against fellow liberals' criticism and can eat meat with conviction. Of course, I'm still against cruelty (hello to true "free range" organic livestock), but not against meat.

    22. Re:Give me a break!!! by DJCF · · Score: 1
      (Disclaimer: I am a meat-eater. Prior to writing this I did a quick google image search for "abattoir" and... did not like what I saw. But I'm still a meat-eater.)

      The grand-parent said,

      See if they'd be willing (not even "curious", just *willing*) to see how the fowl are slaughtered. They won't do it -- they will almost always prefer ignorance, and they'll probably also get mad at you for "trying to ruin their day".

      Isn't this exactly you're doing (Go try to push your morals and ethics off on someone else.)? The grand-parent was merely commenting, not trying to "push his ethics" on you. And you go and get angry, defensive, precisely in the veign of the post you were replying to.

    23. Re:Give me a break!!! by schlick · · Score: 1

      I think it is beyond your capacity to understand that animals cannot be "innocent", and neither can they be "guilty". Animals are not people they are resources, and when they are collected they are property. I don't like what some people do with their animals, but morally my only recourse is to treat them the same way I treat racists. Which is expose them, boycott them and encourage others to do the same.

      --
      "It's because they're stupid, that's why. That's why everybody does everything." -Homer Simpson
    24. Re:Give me a break!!! by Savantissimo · · Score: 1

      Yep. Killed a chicken with an axe at 10, at camp. No problem, except for the plucking, which was a PITA even with boiling water to loosen the feathers.

      It's silly to be cruel when killing animals - it shows unreasonable concern for their feelings. Non-human animals are not even aware of human cultures, let alone the moral codes of those cultures. Pigs are vicious creatures that would eat you if the tables were turned. Rabbits are generally thought of as quintessential vegetarians - but a grown male rabbit will chew off the testicles of young rabbits if given the opportunity. The purpose of farmed animals is to be eaten, and wild animals to become food when they fail to evade predators. Nature has little room for sentiment when it comes to feeding humans and other natural meat-eaters. We are naturally omnivores, not vegetarians.

      --
      "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?" - Patrick Henry
    25. Re:Give me a break!!! by sco_is_for_babies · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah? Well I'm a fifth level vegan -- I don't eat anything that casts a shadow. Remember kids, you can cast aside your arbitrary cravings and live on sunlight

  57. stealth spies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..or stealth murderers. although i suppose that would mean making sure everyone you wanted to kill was in the ocean. And thats just silly.

  58. So many lasers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Threshold: 1:55

    So far, 54 of the 55 existing comments seem to be about Frickin' Laser Beams, or some variation.

  59. Americans, more discusting than russians by far.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Man, doing that to a small helpless animal (cat), in the name of some really screwed up (screaming monkey) patriotic, robotic, cold-war/christianity holier-than-thou mentality makes me really sick...if they really wanted to see the jerks that could end the world with their partiotic mumbo-junbo bible-thumping pradigm, all they had to do, is: LOOK IN THE MIRROR sometime!.

    No wonder we have tons of wars and we can look forward to group(a) screaming monkeys launching their spaced-based quantum particle/string field palanatiod disruper against group(b) islamic fundementalist states of the middle east in say, circa 2095 and we can all have a really cool blast of a time!! (remember to bring spf 9 million sun screen)

    Maybe we can re-design the human race (tranhumanist future) so that we can engineer out all the aggressive/competitive/religious crap, things would be better and we would have no wars and no 911 etc, by believers agains non-believers. (religions such as islam really get me by essentially saying " belive in allah or die unbelievers".

    This eally show me how primitive and intellectualy bankrup/stupid these religions are, can't anybody think for themselves any more? You do have a brain, you should use it from time to time.

    Then maybe we could smarten up and not be so "god has given me the keys to the kingdom" and anthing/being who does not worship my certian imaginairy friends is not worthy of existience or entreance to my ideal fantasy world etc. etc.

  60. Man's cruelty to animals seems boundless by hutchike · · Score: 1

    It seem to me barbaric to let human (American?) warlust spill over to the manipulation of our beautiful natural world. Sticking transponders into the brains of sharks for nefarious ends? Sick.

    --
    Zen tips: Pay attention. Don't take it personally. Believe nothing.
    1. Re:Man's cruelty to animals seems boundless by SSCGWLB · · Score: 1

      What? Cruel? So in addition to being a PETA (Formerly: People Eating Tasty Animals) member, you have a poor grasp of the English language:

      This is the definition of cruel courtesy of Webster's Dictionary: Main Entry: cruel
      Pronunciation: 'krü(-&) l
      Function: adjective
      Inflected Form(s): crueler or crueller; cruelest or cruellest
      Etymology: Middle English, from Old French, from Latin crudelis, from crudus
      1 : disposed to inflict pain or suffering : devoid of humane feelings
      2 a : causing or conducive to injury, grief, or pain
      b : unrelieved by leniency


      Since you obviously didn't RTFA, they plan on using sharks as stealthy scouts. Its not like they are torturing sharks to make them killing machines then attaching drills to their heads.

      Sheesh

      ~nate

    2. Re:Man's cruelty to animals seems boundless by hutchike · · Score: 1
      Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruelty for a definition of cruelty.

      It is generally defined as "indifference to suffering", and I would postulate that the sharks suffer when electrodes are surgically implanted into their brains. I would also suggest that DARPA are indifferent to this suffering. Seems rather cruel to me?

      I generally find that English people (such as myself) have a better grasp of English than our "new world" cousins. We plan one day to teach you the true meaning of irony, but we're waiting for you to stop being ironic first. That's off-topic...

      --
      Zen tips: Pay attention. Don't take it personally. Believe nothing.
    3. Re:Man's cruelty to animals seems boundless by SSCGWLB · · Score: 1

      You cite a wiki (by definition freely editable and not a reliable source of information) as reference against Merriam-Webster... Convincing. Besides that point, surgeons have been putting electrodes in people's brains for years, is that cruel? Or is it only cruel when it's done to non-human animals? I imagine you see killing and eating animals as cruel. I realize all of this 'Seems rather cruel' to you, but that's your prerogative. I, obviously, disagree.

      I would agree that DARPA considers the shark's possible pain/death less important then its primary mission. Since one if its primary missions is to save human life, I have no problem with that.

      As for which country has a better grasp of the English language, its quite possible you Brits do. What that has to do with this argument, I have no idea. As for 'teaching' us anything, ha!

      ~nate

    4. Re:Man's cruelty to animals seems boundless by hutchike · · Score: 1
      The first lesson I'd like to give you is "what goes around comes around", so don't be surprised if your Stealth Sharks are hacked by hakz@warez.ru and cause you some grief in the long run.

      Remember the Taliban? I believe Americans created that monster also? And didn't the USA sponsor Iraq in the Iran/Iraq war? Hmmm. Looks like those chickens sure do come home to roost, as we say over here in Blighty.

      For an instruction manual on Empire Building, please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_empire. Good luck, sharks and all.

      --
      Zen tips: Pay attention. Don't take it personally. Believe nothing.
    5. Re:Man's cruelty to animals seems boundless by ThinkWeak · · Score: 1

      Manipulating the brain of a living being is not quite where I want science to explore. First you have a stealth shark that you control with a joystick, next a chimp, then a human. Sure, the shark and chimp didn't object, because "they're just animals and they don't know any better." But haven't you noticed over the past few years that our government knows what's best for America? So that'll bypass any objections you might have to getting your head split open, and next thing you know you'll be sipped your latte and suddenly slap yourself in the face. Later on you will notice the guy in the corner that continually laughs at you while you keep repeating this action - and he keeps pressing that little red button in his jacket. Moral of the story -> Just because it's a shark getting it's brain messed with doesn't mean the same thing couldn't happen to you.

  61. Aftermarket upgrades by mbarron · · Score: 1

    Can't wait till they retire them, for the newer anti-grav whale tanks.
    Then I can pick the sharks up cheap from army surplus, add on after market laser cannons.
    Then ebay them for a tidy profit!

  62. Pentagon Brilliance by brennz · · Score: 1

    Really, you can tell the Pentagon is getting smarter.

    While there were probably many different sea animals they could have chosen (namely mammals), they selected the most repulsive and potentially horrifying animal with which to perform their research and development. If these were cute cuddly dolphins, the US media would go apesh.t with Flipper Reruns and talk of barbarism, not to mention the eco-outcry. Instead, most of us had the ominous Jaws theme repeating in our brains as we read the article, so most people will be quite apathetic to the plight of sharks.

    On second thought though, perhaps the selection of sharks is not such a bad idea after all. Great white sharks for instance, are nearly apex predators, but not quite http://www.cnn.com/EARTH/9710/08/whale.vs.shark/ They are also very efficient http://www.elasmo-research.org/education/white_sha rk/catch2.htm so DOD could just full up one of these remotecontrol-sharks with a full belly of fat every few years or so.

    Better keep these things out of Chinese waters though, would hate for one of these things to get defin'd for soup.

    1. Re:Pentagon Brilliance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about the dolphins with laser rifles that got away in New Orleans? No american cried wolf, even though their story was slashdotted. Heck, nobody in america even cares if Pentagon is holding 15,000 prisoners in their torture centers around the world without any rights, access to a lawyer, family or due course. Why would they care about a shark that is practically vivisectioned and tortured to death.

  63. Re:Lasers... (Day of the Dolphin) by rtb61 · · Score: 0

    Lasers ?. No, implanted mini-nukes, swim right into a harbour from the other side of the world. Some technologys should just never be invented :-(.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  64. Liability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So if I am bit by a government controlled shark, I can sue right?

    I guess they'll probably find a way to use the patriot act to defend the shark's actions as necessary to fight the war on terror and that I was in the wrong place at the wrong time...

  65. It leaves one question unanswered... by ikarys · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Do they have any fricken lasers?

    1. Re:It leaves one question unanswered... by ikarys · · Score: 1

      Damnit!! I have my comment threshold set to 5+ and was thinking how clever I was with the laser call, and the hilarity that would ensue, and all the kickass reputation points I'd get. I didnt realise that the other hundered odd LESS THAN FIVE comments were also about fricken lasers :(. Still.. its a bit of an oversight missing the lasers.

  66. You've realy gone to far... by mano_k · · Score: 1

    ...when you transplant Hitler's brain into one of the (giant) sharks!

  67. But... by dcapel · · Score: 1

    do they have fucking lasers on their head?!

    (Had to be said :)

    --
    DYWYPI?
  68. Defeated by chum by erroneus · · Score: 1

    Oh for crying out loud! Chum the waters, kill the sharks, hazard avoided by the enemy. Stupid government been watching Austin Powers again haven't they.

  69. The poor shark's rights! by baKanale · · Score: 1

    Won't somebody think of the poor shark's right to privacy?!?!

    But seriously, we all know they're gonna use the sharks to spy on hot girls at the beach. And get them to bite fat guys to sell the videos to Fox.

  70. Hey this gotta be here. by JollyFinn · · Score: 0, Redundant

    1. Put control chip on shark.
    2. Put control chip in monkey.
    3. Put computer interface chip on man.
    4. Upgrade computer interface chip with control chip.
    5. Profit.

    --
    Emacs is good operating system, but it has one flaw: Its text editor could be better.
  71. Ethical by Martin_2006 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "That team is among a number of groups around the world that have gained ethical approval to develop implants that can monitor and influence the behaviour of animals, from sharks and tuna to rats and monkeys."

    Presumably the same body that granted ethical approval for that fine effort in Guantanamo Bay.

  72. For one, I'm sure... by jjustus · · Score: 0, Redundant

    that the sharks will welcome their new remote-controlling human overlords.

  73. Re:Lasers... (Day of the Dolphin) by Half+a+dent · · Score: 1

    More like "Deep Blue Sea".

  74. If you're a foreign spy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...now would be a good time to give up surfing.

  75. Re:Lasers... (Day of the Dolphin) by weierstrass · · Score: 1

    welcome to missing the joke, brainthrust.

    have a nice day

    --
    my password really is 'stinkypants'
  76. Oh my god... by squizzz · · Score: 1

    They want to use lawyers!

  77. next on the list by kertong · · Score: 1

    arming our shark spies with laser cannons mounted on their heads.

    frickin' lasers!

  78. Big question ! by this+great+guy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The question is will these sharks run Linu... I mean in Soviet Russia, do sharks get spie... huh no will they be equipped with freaking lasers ?! Damn it becomes harder and harder to keep track of the Slashdot subculture's memes.

  79. I call prior art by Elbelow · · Score: 1

    There's a Belgian comic book author who has prior art on this: cover picture ! It was a pretty daft idea back then too, though :-) .

  80. Step 2 by vloktboky · · Score: 1

    Attach the freakin' lasers to their heads.

  81. Sharks by Kev_Stewart · · Score: 1

    will they have blue teeth?

  82. Incredible Mr. Limpet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don Knotts is spinning in his (fresh) grave.

  83. No. by perrin · · Score: 1

    The moment another big power learns of such an effort (say China or Russia), sharks would quickly go extinct, as they would start killing sharks indiscriminately around their fleet bases and fleets at sea. It would in effect make sharks a military target that could be attacked at will in times of peace. That would be horribly unethical. Many shark species are already facing extinction.

  84. Another option by VincenzoRomano · · Score: 1

    Another option could also be to use seagulls.
    Once they have genetically modified them and have the neural implant stuck into their brains, the DoD can have a good aerial view and even drop chemically aggressive shits from the skies!

    --
    Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
    For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
  85. can't... help...myself.... by jimicus · · Score: 1

    I've just got visions of G. W. bush sitting in his office, demanding fricking sharks with fricking laser beams attached to their heads.

  86. use dolphins or whales by bxbaser · · Score: 1

    whales would probably be better suited for the tasks.
    When a shark gets close to land people panic but when dolphins or whales do they all gather in a crowd and watch.

  87. Killing machines as killing machines? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sure, I'm being pessimistic, but how long do you think it will be before the first fatal "shark attack" is proved to have been a remote-controlled shark assassin?

  88. Reminds me of the russians ... by YeeHaW_Jelte · · Score: 1

    ... who in WWII trained dogs with explosives to run to tanks and detonate their charges. When they deployed them against german tanks, the dogs immediately made U-turns and headed for the russian tanks quite a distance away, and managed to destroy quite a few of those.

    The russians had obviously underestimated the dogs intelligence. The were able to distinguish the differances between a russian and a german tank, and had been trained with russian tanks ... talk about explode in your face.

    --

    ---
    "The chances of a demonic possession spreading are remote -- relax."
  89. next up... humans by humina · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am familiar with this research project and turned down an opportunity to have worked on it. The thing is the pentagon wants to develop these shark brain implants so that they could one day be used in humans. Congress shut down the BMI section of darpa (brain machine Interface). It got renamed to something fluffy like neural interfaces research group. The whole purpose of it is to be able to implant a device in someones brain so that the pentagon can read a signal on what they are thinking. I would rather work for NIH on a brain implant to help restore neural activity for the disabled instead of making tools for war.

    --
    check out the best blog ever:
    http://oehlberg.com
  90. Re:Americans, more discusting than russians by far by Stormwatch · · Score: 0, Offtopic
    Maybe we can re-design the human race (tranhumanist future) so that we can engineer out all the aggressive/competitive/religious crap, things would be better and we would have no wars and no 911 etc, by believers agains non-believers.
    Why would that be necessary? People can live in peace, as long as they're civilized. And that's not biology, it's a cultural matter. It'd be easier to reengineer our mindsets through education to reach a non-agressive state. Converting believers into disbelief sure would help. In the long run, bombing every madrassa out there would be better than destroying Al Qaeda's facilities.
  91. The Future looks bright... by PinkyDead · · Score: 1

    Ok, initially I see the whole thing with Bin Laden dipping his toe in the Black Sea for his early morning swim and then getting eaten by one of these things - munchity crunchity.

    But then....

    Other countries are gonna want them and these things aren't like Nuclear submarines - if you blow one out of the water it's not going to spark off an international incident or anything. So it will be a real you ate my shark so I'm going to eat yours. At which point it will probably become an Olympic sport.

    Then, as with the nature of all things, it's going to get really cheap to buy your own remote controlled shark.

    Forget Robot Wars! I want one of these... Or what about Robot vs Shark Wars, or even Robot Shark Wars, with cyborg Sharks, or nuclear submarines and pirates and hats and sharks and robots and more sharks and that little fish of Finding Nemo...

    Overstimulated, overstimulated... Deep breaths......

    --
    Genesis 1:32 And God typed :wq!
  92. Steal Shark == Predator 1.0 by Scott+Swezey · · Score: 1

    So, if I have this right, the second version of these should either include laser death rays, or some kind of exploding mechanism?

    (It is the predator that start out unarmed and now carries missiles, right?)

    --
    Scott Swezey
  93. Obligatory Reference by payback451 · · Score: 1

    Will they have friggen laser beams attached to their heads?

  94. Smokescreen? by Ghengis · · Score: 1

    Let's think about it. If the Pentagon REALLY wanted to do this, would we hear about it before-hand? I doubt it. Look at the SR-71, Stealth Bomber, and Stealh Fighter. We found out about those AFTER they were done and in use. Something tells me this is just a ploy to scare the baddies. Oh, they might actually do it, but is their goal intimidation, or actual stealth snooping.

    --

    "The best laid plans of mice and men gang oft agley..." - ROBERT BURNS

  95. What if those sharks start eating yankee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, what happens when russian or islamic hackers take over the control of these zombied sharks and instruct them to swim to Florida and eat swimmers, especially the smallish, loud ones (whom we call children)?

    Similarly, the USA nowadays likes to attach missiles to unmanned drones to hunt terrorist and civilians nearby. What happens whn the enemy hijacks the control and sends the drone back to hit the GIs?

    As Isaac Asimov has said, the laser pistol is powerful but its barrel can be turned against any of the dueling parties.

  96. That's the trouble with electronic communication by lheal · · Score: 1

    I was going for funny, actually. Sharks doing flips. Sharks not doing flips, but eating the podium instead.

    I wanted to end it with something like "You'd go through a lot of trainers that way ... or at least, up to the wrist." I guess I should have.

    --
    Raise your children as if you were teaching them to raise your grandchildren, because you are.
  97. every shark will be suspicious... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Especially in the deep, as oceans are 70% shark free.

    I guess, that will mean that the Chinese will hunt sharks not only for their fins anymore.

  98. One could imagine - the X-Files perspective by Analogy+Man · · Score: 1
    Based on the thought processes (or lack thereof) of the masses it may already be happening....queue eery music.

    Take for example this poll, ...of the troops surveyed...85 percent believe a major reason they were sent into war was "to retaliate for Saddam's role in the Sept. 11 attacks." Granted this poll was conducted by Stars and Stripes, one can't take unpatriotic bleeding heart liberal media like this too seriously.

    --
    When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
  99. Re:Boa Vs Python by Schitzoflink · · Score: 1

    I can't wait till they make two geneticly altered snakes, on a Boa and one a Python and then set them loose in an generic underground facility, then set a group of Hunters on one, and on the other they have this group of military testing mind controll on the other one...THAT would be a good experiment

    --
    Mr. T carries a postage stamp in his wallet at all times on the back is a list of all the fools he doesn't pity
  100. Agent grey by michaelmalak · · Score: 1

    So now opposing militaries will devise chemicals or biologicals to rid the oceans of sharks during wartime. World War III may not just destroy all land life (except ants), it may also destroy all sea life.

  101. With Laserbeams by Dan+B. · · Score: 1

    Are those Sharks with Laser beams attached to their heads? Scotty, that is the best gift!

    --
    Dan. -- So what if it's spelt wrong, nobody's perfect
  102. Can we say... by uniqueUser · · Score: 0

    LASER!

    --
    GENERATION 25: The first time you see this, copy it into your sig on any forum and add 1 to the generation. Social exper
  103. Inside the mind of a shark.... by Ekhymosis · · Score: 1

    "Hmm, how much can I charge my client per hour this time..." or "Damn you I.B.M.!!!!" or "That Darl fucker better pay us for this..."

    --
    Fighting over religion is like seeing whose imaginary friend is best.
  104. Kill all sharks by IPFreely · · Score: 1
    So, in the end, it will amount to nothing more than the extenction of the species. Once anyone who does not want to be spied on finds out that sharks might be spys, they will set out to hunt and kill any shark they find. In the end the sharks will be extinct and the program will be back to square one, but then maybe eyeing some other sea life to put into the same situation as a replacement.

    Nice job guys. Way to think ahead.

    --
    There is nothing so silly as other peoples traditions, and nothing so sacred as our own.
  105. animal cruelty, but shark finning is over by dindi · · Score: 1

    hmm, this just seems not right, but at least they should install some device that blows the shark finning boat up in case they catch one of these brain controlled sharks ...

  106. holy bad movies batman by Ender+Ryan · · Score: 1

    Well, this story sure makes quite a number of really awful sci-fi/horror flicks much less retarded in hindsight.

    --
    Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
  107. Sounds like Acoustic Kitty by guysmilee · · Score: 2, Informative
  108. Movie? by slashname3 · · Score: 1

    Didn't I see this movie already? It ended badly for the lead scientist and the money guy. To say nothing of a number of innocent people that were in the water at the time.

    Has TV gotten so bad that now the government has to do remakes of bad movies instead of leaving that to Hollywood?

  109. First of all by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...the military doesn't tip its hand and say, "Hey all you Americans, we want to build some secret technology! Let us tell you all about it!"

    If they're going to do it, they just do it and then utilitze the technology for 50 or so years. Only when the technology has been surpassed does the old technology start becoming visible in non-secret areas. That's my opinion anyway.

    My guess is the military knows everything it needs to from satellites and other methods and doesn't in any way need sharks. The story is just crass propaganda. Perhaps the military wants a badass animal abusing image. The reality is women are in the military and women don't like killing people and their influence is being felt.

    Can you imagine a military woman killing people by day and then breastfeeding her infant child at night? I cannot.

  110. The end cause... by ShadowNetworks · · Score: 1

    And somehow, I see the animal rights activists having a field day over this one...

    --
    Give me a productive error over a boring, mundane and unproductive fact any day. ~Anon
  111. Lesson to enemies of the US by wazzzup · · Score: 1

    Your days of struggling like a wounded or dying fish are over. If you so much as take one more bath in a chum bucket - BAM! You won't evven know what hit you.

    Ha!

    We've got you now. Bastards.

  112. if george W controls it by AlgorithMan · · Score: 1

    if george W controlls a shark, it is the rebirth of the dopefish

    seriously, samzenpus, this "sensing faint electrical fields, homing in on the trace of a scent" is ridiculous! or do you feel actual pain if you get hit by a bullet in a videogame?

    just because you control a sharks brain, using a joystick, you don't automatically receive his feelings...

    --
    The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
  113. I'm Goin' With Mutant Sea Bass... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    instead. They're environmentally safe, as Dr. Evil can attest.

  114. Harness the Power!!! by PaintJob · · Score: 1

    For those of you who may remember....
    This is certainly no new idea. I believe we have seen this kind of tactic used once before on a small animated series called "Dino-Riders." Of course, it was the bad guys that resorted to the mind control of the dinosaurs.... hmmmm

    --
    recall your inner-child. question everything.
  115. Hmm.. I could be missing something... by Xserv · · Score: 1

    But the practical use of this technology seems to evade me. I'm pretty defense minded, but virtually "sniffing" the water for chemicals and currents, etc seems kind of moot. A lot of chemicals are naturally occuring in nature and could probably be miscontrued as something totally different.

    It just seems like a waste of project money. Sharks aren't really even considered intelligent, are they? This could explain why they're using them for such a test; less outside factors. But really, can someone explain what you would look for? "Here is my drug-sniffing... shark..."??

    I can hear PETA activists screaming already though...

    Xserv

    --
    "I love lamp."
  116. Re:oh god no by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Great, now there's only 7.999.999 to go...

  117. How about PROTECTING THEM instead??? by Electric+Eye · · Score: 1

    Instead of investing untold millions in some fantasy war games, how about the US govt puts some muscle into protecting sharks, which are rapidly declining thanks to scumbag nations like China and Japan who routinely "fin" millions of sharks every year because they're stupid enought to think it's a sign of prosperity or an aphrodesiac. Meanwhile, they're destroying the oceans and are nearing a point where a top predator is going to be eliminated and unleashing who-knows-what on the oceans' ecosystems. Then we'll have to listen to these nations bitch about their declining fish catches and jellyfish swarms....

    Sorry, but sensitive topic for me.

  118. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    mod parent up +6
    if someone living in America doesn't understand why that is a very proud honor and a privilege then it needs a lobotomy and a kick in the ass to expel its sorry ass out of here...see what it'll say in a few years when trying to crawl its way back

    1. Re:MOD PARENT UP by orim · · Score: 1

      Uhm... don't you need to actually do something to *deserve* a privilege? Being born doesn't count, as it's really your mom squeezing you out, *you* yourself didn't do anything.
      Honor? That word is thrown around very lightly these days. What the US is doing in the world these days most people external to the US would describe as "bullying", not as something honorable. Not sure how that word pertains to living in the US though.

      The majority of the people living inside the US would at this point also say that what the US govt is doing inside the US is not very honorable either, with all the endless scandals and lies just rolling off the very tip of the govt down...

      One thing this country has is money, loads and loads of it. There's so much money that even after the people at the top grab all they can and then some more, people in the middle still get a pretty decent bagful of it.

      And that's the benefit of living in the US - with a little effort, having access to boatloads of cash (when compared to the rest of the world).

      --
      "If you could only see what I've seen with your eyes..." - Roy Batty
    2. Re:MOD PARENT UP by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      if someone living in America doesn't understand why that is a very proud honor and a privilege then it needs a lobotomy and a kick in the ass to expel its sorry ass out of here...see what it'll say in a few years when trying to crawl its way back

      In a few years, this place will have gone further to the dogs than it has already, which is pretty fucking far just since I became old enough to understand the news.

      If you didn't notice the drastic erosion of your rights in the last few presidential terms, then you clearly don't understand what's happening to America.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  119. Tyranny at it's best by fusionsquared · · Score: 0

    Tyranny on the go. Double order please. Enough with this "Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..." The US government has for decades now been telling us that it has the right to govern those who don't give their consent. Why stop with humans?

  120. Wrong password by 03flhrci · · Score: 1

    After 3 wrong passwords you get eaten

  121. As an American who is smarter than you by flyinwhitey · · Score: 1

    I recognized right away that you're not too intelligent.

    How?

    This

    "lower taxes"

    and this

    "national health care"

    Nice troll though

    --
    How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
  122. $44 billion... by FridayBob · · Score: 1

    ... is what the US government spends annually on spying: obviously way too much. I mean, do we really need zombie sharks? A real hair-brained idea if I ever heard one. It'll never work. Most likely it's just a way to keep a couple of unimaginative researchers from loosing their jobs. I say leave the poor animals be; with the shark fin industry and everything they have it hard enough as it is these days.

  123. Nope by flyinwhitey · · Score: 1

    "It's not *just* that people are dumb. They are."

    Leave PETA out of this.

    "But they also don't *want* to know what they do to animals (or causes others to do to animals on their behalf)."

    No, you nitwit, it's that most people realize the benefit of using animals in place of humans. As in "using sharks for this purpose will help SAVE HUMAN LIVES".

    Animals lives aren't as important as human lives. Period, end of discussion, save your retort, it doesn't change that.

    --
    How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
  124. Better hurry up by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    Judging from the rate that sharks are being fished to their limit I'd say the most likely thing the DOD will get data on is a fishing net. Once again when April 15 passes it will be with a sense that my government is pissing away my money.

    "General, we have reason to believe that Al-Queda is recruiting lobsters!"

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  125. What the hell? by flyinwhitey · · Score: 1

    So you watched a video of some people abusing an animal, and you decided that

    A) that was representative of the industry as a whole and

    b) you'd stop eating meat because of it

    Why are people like you so easily manipulated?

    Oh wait, I know it's because you watch a video of some people abusing an animal and decide that

    A) that was representative of the industry as a whole and

    b) you'd stop eating meat because of it

    "It was the most disgusting thing I ever saw"

    Well, if you were able to watch a video of your life, I imagine the part where you decided to stop using your fucking brain and allow yourself to be manipulated by some assholes with an agenda would disgust you far more.

    --
    How pathetic are you that you follow me from topic to topic and waste all your mod points at once modding me down?
  126. Why not use sharks? (Re:Wonderful) by mi · · Score: 1
    Ah, man: never encumbered by second thoughts about exploiting animals for warfare.
    Why, what's wrong with that? Humans have, throughout history, used dogs, horses, elephants, camels in overt warfare. Poisonous snakes were also sometimes used covertly. Pigeons were (and are) used for communication... Even bacteria and viruses were weapons.

    Why should we suddenly have qualms about sharks?

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:Why not use sharks? (Re:Wonderful) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So because we've been doing it (using animals in war) for hundreds of years and it's commonly held as an acceptable practice, it's ethically ok?

      derrrrr! no!

      the same arguments can be used for any long used, acceptable practice. because it has a history does not religate it in to the realm of ethical soundness!

  127. Cause for Concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What happens if one of these sharks goes rogue and attacks some hapless US citizen (e.g., surfer, swimmer, diver)? Wouldn't the US government be on the hook for a massive civil suit?

    1. Re:Cause for Concern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess it depends on what you consider more dangerous: sharks or lawyers?

  128. YOU are being manipulated... by Synapse2000 · · Score: 1

    As I read the teaser and made way to the story, I thought "the fanatics will be all over this one". And naturally, the press pull one tidbit out of a science update and wrap it in a way that will get the greatest response - manipulating YOU. Do you feel manipulated? Niether do the sharks... Billions and billions of plant and animal life are manipulated and KILLED daily to sustain your stinkin' life. As you head to your last dying breath, you and your loved ones will be grasping for technology pioneered by animals - and then SUE the medical and corporate entities that tried to extend your life when the technology doesn't function to your liking. Hyopcrites... every last one of you whiners...

  129. I quote ST4:TVH by Eq+7-2521 · · Score: 1

    Gillian: You're not from the military are you? Trying to teach whales to retrieve torpedoes or some dipshit stuff like that?

    Kirk: No, ma'am. No dipshit.

    Gillian: Well, good. If that was one thing I would have dropped you off right here.

    Spock: Gracie is pregnant.

    --
    At my age I find coming up with a witty signature too exhausting.
  130. Not an ideal surveillance device... by cogito+ergo+blog · · Score: 1

    So now rouge undersea vessels will simply release large amounts of bloody meat periodically to distract sharks that may be pursuing them? These implants may provide stimulus sufficient to alter the course of a roaming shark but I seriously doubt they will have sufficient influence to deter them from an easy meal.

    --
    "There is no dark side of the moon really. Matter of fact it's all dark."
  131. I for one... by methangel · · Score: 1

    ...welcome our new stealth shark overlords.

  132. Is this what Bush meant? by joerdie · · Score: 1

    Is this what Bush meant when he was talking about animal human hybrids in the state of the union addess?

  133. Bat Bombs by osarusan · · Score: 1
    This reminds me of something I heard about an plan by the allied military in WW2 to strap small bombs to hundreds of bats, which they would release over Germany cities. The bats would fly into roofs and the bombs would detonate, causing fires and damage all over the cities.

    I don't remember why exactly the idea was scrapped (other than being totally pointless and stupid). I think I read that there was fear of the bats prematurely detonating or something like that.

    In any case, this controlling sharks thing is just as stupid as the bat bombs plan. This seems like a case of someone saying, "Hot damn, that's a cool idea. Let's do it!" rather than, "OK, we need stealth underwater spies... what's the best possibly way we can accomplish this?"

  134. Think, soldier, this is different by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mister, do you not recognize any difference at all between training a dog to do what comes naturally to any social animal and planting electrodes directly into a shark to control its mind? Please re-read at least the summary, if not the article, and consider the contrasts here. We're talking about remote controls to "guide" them, altering their natural behavior with electrical impulses. Consider how exactly this is similar in any way to bonding with them (as a handler to a service dog).

  135. Think about this logically by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1
    These guys were yelling and screaming expletives at her, beating her with pipe wrenches and gate rods, sexually molesting her with a steel rod. And then to add insult to injury, smashed her over the head with a cinder block, it was then they started to skin and dismember her while she was still alive. It was the most disgusting thing I ever saw

    Agreed that is disgusting. But think about this logically.
    • Is this an efficient way to kill animals?
      • Slaughterhouse workers make a salary just like everybody else. They don't just do it for thrills.
      • It would probably cost $20 to have a bunch of freaks beat a pig to death and $0.25 to guillotine the same pig.
      • Would a slaugherhouse with $20 in slaughter costs be able to compete in an efficient capitalistic market?

    • Does this improve the quality of the meat?
      • No, it makes the meat pretty terrible to eat, all filled with fight or flight chemicals.
      • Do slaughterhouses want to be known to their customers as the place where you can bring your livestock to be converted into offensive-tasting meat?

    • Does this seem like it makes any sense at all as an undercover video or does it make more sense that this is a propaganda piece payed for by those who wish to create such propaganda?


    I'm not suggesting that it's not a well-done propaganda piece but think about this logically. And then think about who produced it and what their intention was towards you. Then thing about if you feel used or you're happy to go along with their agenda.
    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  136. Now the sharks... by schlick · · Score: 1

    ... need tinfoil hats.

    But seriously. Shut those hippies up whining about abuse of animals. Would I watch an animal slaughterd for my food? Hell, I'd slaughter it my self (and I have). Sure there are some depraved people out there that do sick things to animals, but it is not the meat industry that causes it, and getting rid of the meat industry will not stop it. They are sick bastards who will do it anyway. In the end animals are property. Beware of anyone who trys to convince you otherwise because they do not value human life above animals.

    --
    "It's because they're stupid, that's why. That's why everybody does everything." -Homer Simpson
  137. Sharks? Are you kidding? by Kitt3n · · Score: 1

    So, let's bring animals into our spy missions cause we're not smart enough to build technology stealth enough to do it on our own. Riiight, so then our enemies find out and start blowing up every shark they see. Oh, now sharks have gone the way of the dinosaur.

    --
    =*^.^*=
    1. Re:Sharks? Are you kidding? by NerveGas · · Score: 1


        There's a bit more truth to that than some people realize. One of my acquaintences was a door-gunner in a chopper in Vietnam. He showed me a picture of the side of his chopper, it had the various jeeps, trucks, and other "kills" painted on the side - and a bunch of elephants.

        Because the VC sometimes used elephants to carry rockets, if they passed elephants, they were often ordered to fire on them without question of what they were actually used for. A .30-caliber bullet wouldn't normally be what you'd think of as an "elephant gun", but when you're spraying them out at the rate of an M60, you can certainly take an elephant down - and the ones you don't have hundreds of bullet wounds to deal with (or die from) later. Whenever man is involved, animals always get the shaft.

      --
      Oh, you're not stuck, you're just unable to let go of the onion rings.
  138. All Sharks Suspect! by Sody · · Score: 1

    The biggest issue I'd have with this is the fact that if we start using sharks as spies, all sharks will become suspected spies. So, other countries will do what they can to keep sharks away, not knowing which ones are "wired," including killing any they see. Sharks have enough problems with keeping up their natural populations without being summarily shot/netted/etc. by people who suspect them of spying!

  139. Re:Lasers... (Day of the Dolphin) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean the exact same joke that's made every fucking time an article mentions sharks or lasers? At least sometimes people get clever with the "In Soviet Russia..." jokes.

  140. What an incredible breakthrough! by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

    "We believe we are the first to record neural activity from a monkey doing a somersault"

    You, Sir, would also be the first to have bothered.

    --
    I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
  141. SciFi books by Alinraz · · Score: 1

    Looks like someone over there has been reading Larry Niven and Steven Barnes' book: Saturn's Race! Hopefully they got to the end and realized it didn't end well...

  142. Precision-guided poodles by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've read the article, and there seems to be no mention of weaponising the creatures. I hope that never happens, it would truly make me ashamed to be a member of the human race.

    Does the implant cause pain? Can it be removed after a few 'missions' so it can go back to a natural existence?

    The article mentions that the research may lead to breakthroughs in paralysis research which shows there is value there, but remotely controlling an animal for military use...

    What's next, dropping elephants from high altitude?

    1. Re:Precision-guided poodles by Em+Adespoton · · Score: 1

      Change Elephants to Whales and petunias and you might be on to something ;)

  143. Well it's curtain call for the USof A by BlindRobin · · Score: 1

    The Pentagon has finaly jumped the shark....

  144. Let me bust this Myth for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi,
    I'm a Canadian. Just wanted to prove to you that the Canadian Health care system is very popular here. Nobody in their right mind wants your system. Here's my proof:
    Q.
        When was the last time a Candian politician ran a platform that included the removal of Health Care?
    A.
        Never.

    1. Re:Let me bust this Myth for you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not a myth. Try a 22 month wait for an MRI scan in Saskatchewan.

      Canadian health care sucks... just not as badly as it does in the States. Fortunately for us, there are other countries with functional mixed models (private/public systems).

      Why can't those Liberal/Dipper dimwits accept that while "Americanizing" our system wouldn't be good, "Swedenizing," would be? Of course the answer is that it's purely a political tool. It's something they scream to eliminate debate.

      They can't stop fellating the corpses of Trudeau and Tommy Douglas...

  145. No, no! They've got it all wrong... by cmdrwhitewolf · · Score: 1

    We wanted neural implants for use with politicians!

    --
    [Now, I'm off to lift my le... Um, visit... at another place.]
  146. And in other news by ross.w · · Score: 1

    in a spate of mysterious attacks around the world, the leaders of Iran, North Korea, Syria and France were eaten by sharks while swimming at the beach.

    --
    If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
  147. Yup, Now we get Fish n Chips by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yup, now we get fish and chips. Lets not stop there. The knowledge gained from
    this is supposed to aid in controlling new prosthetic devices. That means humans are
    the ultimate target animal for this 'stealth'. Now who is kidding who!? Who is 'stealthing' who? What is the military really up to? Are they really interested in zombies or armies
    of zombies that move like schools of fish to attack without mercy or any self preservation, berserkers on a nightmare battlefield. Of course the next question is who is going to 'volunteer' to become one of these zombies? Or are they going to be 'sentenced' to it?
    For what? Jaywalking? Being a Democrat? Being black? Being black and democratic in New Orleans?

  148. PETA? Bah. by susano_otter · · Score: 1

    PETA won't go near this one, mark my words, on account of sharks not being cute.

    --

    Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.

  149. No outcry? No indignation? Willing slaves? by fygment · · Score: 1

    So Japan controls cockroaches, then women/people, and now we have sharks and a number of groups around the world that have gained ethical approval to develop implants that can monitor and influence the behaviour of animals, from sharks and tuna to rats and monkeys.

    It is easy to decry the abuse of the animals in question.
    It is equally easy to see the potential benefits to the relatively small number of humans (globally) who have nerve damage.
    But why no hue and cry on the potential abuse of this technology on humans?
    Guns, germs, and chemicals may kill you. This can enslave you.

    --
    "Consensus" in science is _always_ a political construct.
  150. Saturn's Race by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    read "Saturn's Race" by Larry Niven and Steve Barnes. (i think it was Barnes)