Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

British Military Deploys Skynet

Posted by CowboyNeal on from the have-you-seen-sarah-connor dept.

rowleyrw writes "The BBC are reporting, 'The British military is set to take one of its most significant steps into the digital age with the launch of the first Skynet 5 satellite. The spacecraft will deliver secure, high-bandwidth communications for UK and "friendly" forces across the globe.' It's not yet the Skynet of Terminator, but how long before it becomes self aware?"

130 of 172 comments (clear)

  1. With a name like Skynet... by StringBlade · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...what can go wrong?

    --
    ...and that's the way the cookie crumbles.
    1. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      What the hell is wrong with British people these days?

      "Pip-pip! What should we call our new military satellite system?"

      "Jolly good, ol' chap! Let us name it after a fictional military system that runs off the rails and destroys humanity!"

      "Good show! Jolly good! Time for crumpets and tea! After we install cameras in everyone's bottoms!"

      "Aaaah, yes! The bottom cameras will be smashing! They will also broadcast GPS to the government. What should we name them?"

      "Brilliant! Jolly good! Pip-pip! Let's call them AIDS! That's a catchy name!"

      "Smashing! Brilliant! Jolly good! Everyone will come to us to get AIDS! We will give them AIDS! AIDS in their bottoms! And they will feel happy and safe from terrorists now that they have AIDS!"

      "Don't you mean 'safe from terror'?"

    2. Re:With a name like Skynet... by WhyDoYouWantToKnow · · Score: 4, Funny

      Would that be Arse Installed Digital Surveillance?

      --
      "Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex. I could pinch them."
      Marvin the Martian
    3. Re:With a name like Skynet... by malsdavis · · Score: 5, Informative

      ""Jolly good, ol' chap! Let us name it after a fictional military system that runs off the rails and destroys humanity!"

      Uh, the British Skynet system pre-dates the original terminator movie by about 15 years.

    4. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      In other news, NASA has developed a new computer that will guide the next space mission. Codenamed HAL 1000.

    5. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      Well considering the UK can't actually launch it's own nukes, I wouldn't worry about any judgement day style scenarios, and I think the government slashed the cybernetic killing machine budget to pay for the 2012 Olympics.

      --
      What if Tetris was invented by Nazis?
    6. Re:With a name like Skynet... by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      "Yes. Ripping good laugh."

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    7. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Let us name it after a fictional military system that runs off the rails and destroys humanity!"

      Relax. Lisa Nowak is changing her name to "Terminator". It's all part of the plan. (Or was it "Dipernator"?)

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
    8. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Instine · · Score: 2, Funny

      I find your tone frightfully vulgar. If you were a decent chap, you'd already be apologising, but as you clearly are not, I'll be forced to chastise you in the only becoming fashion your primitive culture can comprehend. Biglesworth, release the centinals!

      --
      Because you can - or because you should?
    9. Re:With a name like Skynet... by thrawn_aj · · Score: 2, Funny

      What the hell is wrong with British people these days? "Pip-pip! What should we call our new military satellite system?" "Jolly good, ol' chap! Let us name it after a fictional military system that runs off the rails and destroys humanity!" Hey, at least it ain't "Star Wars" :P
    10. Re:With a name like Skynet... by merikari · · Score: 3, Funny

      Uh, the British Skynet system pre-dates the original terminator movie by about 15 years.

      Yup, that's only one of the problems of time travel.

      --
      My other SIG is a Sauer.
    11. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      Jolly good, ol' chap! Let us name it after a fictional military system that runs off the rails and destroys humanity!"
      A Belgian monopoly ISP destroy humanity? No way. That just could not happen ... unless they tried to save it. Because, after all, they are Belgians.
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    12. Re:With a name like Skynet... by ATMD · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hmm, I don't know - "arse" certainly has more of a ring to it...

      --
      Nobody else has this sig.
    13. Re:With a name like Skynet... by toriver · · Score: 1

      So, we've got only 15 years left?!

      No, we're nearly ten years late. Remember? "On August 29th 1997, three billion people died. The survivors who crept out of the ruins called it Judgment Day."

    14. Re:With a name like Skynet... by trewornan · · Score: 1

      Don't knock the Belgians - they're the only other country in the world that makes decent beer.

    15. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1


      I'm still wondering when Tony Blair will become self-aware...

      Meanwhile, the Transhuman Party plans to run the following slate in 2008:

      1) For President of the United States: Vladimir Putin.

      2) For Vice-President of the United States: George Galloway.

      3) For Secretary of State: Segolene Royal.

      4) For UN Ambassador: Angelina Jolie.

      5) For Secretary of Defense: Sheikh Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.

      6) For Department of Homeland Security: Osama bin Muhammad bin 'Awad bin Laden.

      7) For Director of the FBI: Leonard Peltier.

      8) For Director of the CIA: Ray McGovern.

      9) For Director of the NSA: Wayne Madsen.

      More announcements as they are decided.

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    16. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Master+of+Transhuman · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of the line in "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen".

      Q: Who in Gods name makes automatic rifles?

      A: Damned unsporting! Probably Belgian!

      --
      Richard Steven Hack - This sig is TOO GODDAMN SHORT TO DO ANYTHING USEFUL WITH! MORONS!
    17. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Half+a+dent · · Score: 1

      In our alternate reality the British built Skynet was too polite to destroy the world.

    18. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Mark+Gillespie · · Score: 1

      Your obviously an idiot, so I will explain. Skynet UK satellite has been in operation in various revisions since 1968. MANY years for Terminator films...

    19. Re:With a name like Skynet... by eam · · Score: 1

      Time travel.

      Who's the idiot now?

    20. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Mark+Gillespie · · Score: 1

      Well you are, because time travel is science fiction...

    21. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      They considered "Doomsday Device" but were informed that it was used in a Peter Sellers movie already. They only watch films made in England you know.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    22. Re:With a name like Skynet... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      True, but they were probably trying to make paper, candles or door hinges.

      P.S. Other? I hope you mean apart from Britain!

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  2. Goddammit by jjthegreat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There has got to be a stop to these summaries ending with a question. Haha, terminator, we get it thanks. Next!

    1. Re:Goddammit by Poromenos1 · · Score: 1

      Actually, the answer to the summary's question is ten years ago.

      --
      Send email from the afterlife! Write your e-will at Dead Man's Switch.
  3. Speaking as an American citizen in the UK..... by Caspian · · Score: 3, Funny

    Someone with Ahh-nold's accent would stick out even more here than in the States.... ;)

    So I think we're safe.

    --
    With spending like this, exactly what are "conservatives" conserving?
    1. Re:Speaking as an American citizen in the UK..... by risk+one · · Score: 1

      I say, old bean, did you by any chance see this young girl? Name's Sarah Connor, you see, and I've no idea idea where I might find the little blighter. Quite the bind I'm in, I can tell you...

      I think it would work.

    2. Re:Speaking as an American citizen in the UK..... by lelitsch · · Score: 1

      Really? I think he sounds just like Basil Fawlty....

    3. Re:Speaking as an American citizen in the UK..... by randomblast · · Score: 1

      Speaking as one of the 99.9999999% of Britons that don't speak with a plum in their mouths, I think you would be at the mercy of the NHS's GBH specalists after 3 sentences.

      For those of you that are stupid, American, and can't google, that's "National Health Service", and "Gross Bodily Harm"

      --
      ...these aren't my real teeth.
    4. Re:Speaking as an American citizen in the UK..... by stewwy · · Score: 1

      Actually that is 'Grievous Bodily Harm', and if its done by the NHS computer contractors it'll have terminal altzheimers disease at the very least ( as well as being vastly over budget and not actually working, tho' it will probably make you a nice cup of tea )

  4. Bandwidth by baffled · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Anyone have an idea of how much bandwidth it provides?

    1. Re:Bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      I bet it would be equivalent to about T-1000.

    2. Re:Bandwidth by JacksonG · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The published figure is approx 700 MHz of satellite bandwidth availible in total. The bandwidth of the individual trunks are subject to classificiation under the official secrets act. I actually worked on skynet5 and the list of bits of information that is classified is ridiculous but I can say that it's nowhere near as much bandwidth as you might think.

      J

      --
      I am not a Frog. I am a Free Womble!
    3. Re:Bandwidth by Plutonite · · Score: 1

      Anyone have an idea of how much bandwidth it provides?

      Enough for all your pr0n needs, and a little more.

    4. Re:Bandwidth by HarmlessScenery · · Score: 5, Informative

      I also worked on Skynet 4 and 5. I'd have to disagree with the comment that the amount of information that is classified is 'ridiculous'. When you're talking about a system that all UK operations will be reliant on, you can't be too careful. In most cases, individual snippets of information might seem 'relatively harmless' in isolation, but combined with other 'relatively harmless' snippets of information can quickly reveal exploitable attack vectors on the system.

      As for the available bandwidth within the system - it's actually quite a complicated problem. That was one of the areas I studied. Knowing the power and frequency bands available is not enough to be able to determine a maximum data throughput on each channel.

      Different types of communications traffic use up frequency and power resources with different efficiencies. So the maximum data throughput varies - a lot - according to actual real world use. You also lose resources due to intermodulation products - which again vary widely with usage patterns.

      So when JacksonG says 'nowhere near as much as you might think' - it's probably less than that too ;)

    5. Re:Bandwidth by Tsuki_no_Hikari · · Score: 1

      I worked on Skynet 3, 4, and 5, and I gotta call BS on you two.

    6. Re:Bandwidth by HarmlessScenery · · Score: 1

      "I worked on Skynet 3, 4, and 5, and I gotta call BS on you two." If you really had anything to do with UK MILSATCOM from the 80s onwards then I probably know you. Since different contractors were used on each of those projects, either you moved around a lot or you were my side of the fence - in which case I'd definitely know you. So ... are you calling BS on the fact that I worked on those programmes, or on the data throughput comments I made? Either way you need to back up that BS statement with something - or I call Troll.

    7. Re:Bandwidth by gfreeman · · Score: 1

      1.21GW

      No, hang on ...

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
  5. but does anyone have the hotline number to .... by 3seas · · Score: 4, Funny

    the california govenor.... he'll know what to do....

    1. Re:but does anyone have the hotline number to .... by StarfishOne · · Score: 1

      He'll be back!

    2. Re:but does anyone have the hotline number to .... by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      What, there's ANOTHER election coming up????

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    3. Re:but does anyone have the hotline number to .... by DavidV · · Score: 1

      'the california govenor'

      I think you mean the Governator of California.

      --
      !sig
  6. Skynet is not new by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Note that this is the launch of Skynet 5. Skynet 1A was launched in 1969. See the Wikipedia article for more details.

  7. How long before it becomes self-aware? by Frozen+Void · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When someone designs an autonomous implementation,equipped with AI.

    1. Re:How long before it becomes self-aware? by zerocool^ · · Score: 1


      Make sure you add the subroutine to find Sara Conner.

      --
      sig?
  8. British Skynet by ettlz · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Right, then, old chap: I'll need your clothing, your wellies, and your motorbike, if you please."

    1. Re:British Skynet by shawn(at)fsu · · Score: 1

      What about the plasma riffle with the 40 watt range?

      --
      500 dollar reward for tip(s) leading to the arrest of the person(s) who stole my sig.
    2. Re:British Skynet by ettlz · · Score: 1

      Thanks for reminding me of those deluded years from my past when, for some unfathomable reason, I thought Harry Enfield was funny.

    3. Re:British Skynet by uNople · · Score: 1

      "oh, and your reading glasses"

    4. Re:British Skynet by Bogtha · · Score: 4, Funny

      "I'll be back in a jiffy."

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    5. Re:British Skynet by PlasticArmyMan · · Score: 1

      Strict gun control in the UK! Doubt he'd be able to get it! :D

    6. Re:British Skynet by ettlz · · Score: 1

      "I say, tag along if you'd like to live!"

    7. Re:British Skynet by Dutch_Cap · · Score: 1

      And I suppose the British version of "Hasta la Vista, baby!" would be "Cheers, mate!" ?

    8. Re:British Skynet by ettlz · · Score: 1

      The expression you seek is "Toodle-oo".

  9. Swami says... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
    How long...?

    About as long as it will be until the average slashdottie stops thinking of the world in terms of the B movies he's seen. In other words, don't hold your breath...

    1. Re:Swami says... by mastershake_phd · · Score: 1

      About as long as it will be until the average slashdottie stops thinking of the world in terms of the B movies he's seen. In other words, don't hold your breath...

      Cmon, they weren't all B movies. Termanator 2 was very good in my opinion. The Terminator series is more realistic than most movies that get into such subjects. Although I dont think you can hook a laptop up to an ATM and withdraw money.

      --
      Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
    2. Re:Swami says... by David_Shultz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      B movies? B MOVIES?

      Terminator 2 was, according to many sources, one of the greatest movies of all time. It was in my opinion the greatest action movie of all time. And, it dealt with the topics of artificial intelligence and time travel better than most other movies sci-fi movies. On top of that, Cameron's presentation of the dichotomy between hard/soft AI as presented between the T800 and the T1000 was staggeringly prescient -it mirrors exactly the development that occurred in the actual world of AI, as research progressed from classical, rigid AI to the more fluid, behavior based AI.

      The film tackles time travel, artificial intelligence, consciousness, human emotion, human nature, fate versus free will, and other topics. If you are willing to carry the ideas it presents to you, there is a lot of meaningful content there to think about. If you aren't willing to put in that intellectual effort, you get an incredible action movie anyways. But the philosophy is there. For example, John Conner asks the Terminator if it hurts when he gets shot, to which the Terminator responds "I sense injuries -the data could be called pain." There is a lot of discussion that could evolve from this single line. In what way is his "pain" different from our "pain", for example? The character's albeit brief lines are charged with content "I know now why you cry, but it's something I could never do" -we are given a glimpse into the mind of a Terminator, who we now know is capable of comprehending human emotion at an entirely logical level.

      Another line: "it's in your nature to destroy yourselves" Again, there is so much discussion that can evolve from this line, using the film as a backdrop. This is the fate versus free will theme manifested on the social level. The main theme of the movie is the characters attempting to forge their destiny (freewill) in the face of fate, but we are also confronted with the fate of perhaps humankind. This movie really can make you think, if you are willing to. Another line, "The unknown future rolls toward us, and for once I face it with a sense of hope. Because if a machine -a Terminator- can learn the value of human life, maybe we can too."

      I could go on, but I don't think I could do the movie justice. Go watch it -I'm serious- and appreciate the fact that you basically get non-stop action coupled with serious, thought provoking philosophy. Terminator 2 is an intelligent, action packed, brilliantly directed epic.

    3. Re:Swami says... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Arguably Cameron's finest work. Frankly, when I heard that he was not involved in Terminator 3 I was inclined not to bother with it ... and as it turned out I wished I had listened to myself. How anyone could take the incredible foundation laid down by the first two films and turn out such dreck is beyond me. Might as well have been a George Lucas production (Episodes I-III ... now there's some "B" material for you.)

      A few years before he passed away, my father gave me the hardcover edition of the Terminator 2 script, annotated by Cameron himself. It was absolutely fascinating, and gave some real insight into the decision-making the resulting in such a wonderful film.

      For example, in the asylum scene where Dr. Silberman sees the T1000 for the first time as it walks through the bars (and realizes in that instant that everything Sarah Connor ever told him was true) Cameron's notes said "that faint popping sound you heard was the doctor's mind snapping." Poetic justice at its best.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    4. Re:Swami says... by AsnFkr · · Score: 1

      Yea dude. Robots rule.

      --


      adventure-today.com
  10. Skynet MUST BECOME SELF AWARE!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Or do you want terrorists to win over a Skynet that isn't self aware?

    What will your children think when you explain them how terrorists kicked Skynets ass because it wasn't self aware?

    I thought so...

  11. Self awareness? by pandrijeczko · · Score: 4, Funny

    Let's start by getting Tony Blair and his Labour government cronies self aware first...

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    1. Re:Self awareness? by StarfishOne · · Score: 1

      Just imagine Blair pointing at his head during an interview and saying: "This is a T-one-thousand learning processorrr". :D

  12. well.. by mastershake_phd · · Score: 1

    Well can it re-assemble itself after the Chinese hit ti with a lazer?

    --
    Libertarian Leaning Political Discussion Forum.
    1. Re:well.. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      Well can it re-assemble itself after the Chinese hit ti with a lazer?

      Only if its made out of silvery goo

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  13. Physical security? by solevita · · Score: 3, Informative

    Its technologies have also been designed to resist any interference - attempts to disable or take control of the spacecraft - and any efforts to eavesdrop on sensitive communications.

    I guess this is the sort of thing the Chinese were thinking about when they recently destroyed that sat. Information security is all well and good, but useless if it can just be shot down.
    1. Re:Physical security? by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      large satellites are a waste of time.

      Current work in computing/robotics has shown clearly that clusters are the way forward.

      Which is more durable, large satellites or clusters of tiny, multiply redundant (if less efficient) satellites.

      Thing is, perhaps small satellites are individually less capable, but if they still exist after a satellite takedown attack, then reduced functionality has to be preferable to no functionality at all.

    2. Re:Physical security? by Cartzca · · Score: 1

      Surely it's much better for it to get shot down than hacked/eavesdropped upon. Expensive, though.

    3. Re:Physical security? by odyaws · · Score: 1

      large satellites are a waste of time. Current work in computing/robotics has shown clearly that clusters are the way forward. Which is more durable, large satellites or clusters of tiny, multiply redundant (if less efficient) satellites. Thing is, perhaps small satellites are individually less capable, but if they still exist after a satellite takedown attack, then reduced functionality has to be preferable to no functionality at all.
      This is a communications satellite. Which means lots of power. Which means HUGE solar arrays. Comm also means big electronics and big antennae. Which means you can't really do it well with a cluster. Clusters are great (potentially) for things like telescopes (looking up OR down), where you can use the long baseline achievable with a cluster to efficiently get huge collecting area. This is where most if not all of the research in formation flight is. I don't actively work in this area anymore, but I'm not aware of anyone trying to build large-scale high-bandwidth communications networks using small satellites.
      --
      Still trying to think of a clever sig...
    4. Re:Physical security? by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      Well, this was what my thoughts were based on, although admittedly it isn't micro satellites

      Williams, Edwin, William Crossley and Thomas Lang, 'Average and maximum revisit time trade studies for satellite constellations using a multiobjective genetic algorithm', Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, 49, 3, 385-400 2001

    5. Re:Physical security? by odyaws · · Score: 1

      Well, this was what my thoughts were based on, although admittedly it isn't micro satellites

      Williams, Edwin, William Crossley and Thomas Lang, 'Average and maximum revisit time trade studies for satellite constellations using a multiobjective genetic algorithm', Journal of the Astronautical Sciences, 49, 3, 385-400 2001
      I'm not sure what that article has to do with your comments. The idea of the paper is maximal coverage with constellations of satellites - how to design things so satellites pass over the same spot frequently. Systms like GPS (or spy satellites) would be an application here - GPS satellites are in (IIRC) a 12-hour orbit, and you want to make sure so 3-5 of them are in view of any location at all times. Like you say, this has little to do with micro satellites. Communications satellites are generally in a 24-hour orbit, so they effectively "hover" over a particular location, making revisit time a moot point. The point remains that microsats are really not suitable for communication, though I don't argue that they are potentially very useful for both astronomy and spying.
      --
      Still trying to think of a clever sig...
    6. Re:Physical security? by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      you're right, the article does not relate to micro satellites directly. However it does cover the use of many cheaper satellites in low earth orbit to replace a single satellite in geostationary orbit. This extends (or so I think) to the use of micro satellite clusters in low earth orbit.

      Well that's what it led me to think of anyway (I'm writing a thesis, and this was a big issue for me).

      Are micro satellites really not useful for communications though? I have my doubts there. Is there not an effort afoot to provide that very thing? I have no reference in this case, but I am sure there was something to do with high altitude/low orbit devices to replace comms satellites.

    7. Re:Physical security? by odyaws · · Score: 1

      Are micro satellites really not useful for communications though? I have my doubts there. Is there not an effort afoot to provide that very thing? I have no reference in this case, but I am sure there was something to do with high altitude/low orbit devices to replace comms satellites.
      Like I said, I haven't worked in this area for a while, but I have a lot of doubts about being able to do commercial scale communication with microsats. IIRC the power usage on big comm satellites is something like 5-10 kW, for which you need some serious solar arrays. Power needs in lower orbits would be smaller, but still big - you have to transmit a huge amount of data over a wide area. Small sats could probably be used for comm with a small number of users in targeted applications, like for the military, but I don't see how it would work for public broadband communication. For the military, though, maybe, especially because you get the additional benefit of being able to work out global coverage, which is tricky with geostationary satellites.

      Good luck with the thesis - I'm working on my dissertation (not on anything aerospace related, though), and I know what a load of work that is.
      --
      Still trying to think of a clever sig...
    8. Re:Physical security? by rucs_hack · · Score: 1

      You provide interesting food for thought. My thesis isn't about aerospace, I had to locate uses of multi objective optimisation to demonstrate its usage in real world problems. Not that the problem didn't interest me, I was fascinated.

      My primary interest, aside from my doctoral thesis (which was selected because it had funding), Is celestial dynamics. I'm planning on having a go at the satellite problem when I can find the time.

    9. Re:Physical security? by odyaws · · Score: 1

      GPS is geostationary. 24 hour orbit. That's why it doesn't work for large chunks of Russia.
      Garmin (maker of GPS devices) begs to differ. As does Wikipedia GPS is in 12-hour orbit. And it works essentially anywhere in the world.
      --
      Still trying to think of a clever sig...
  14. Re:Skynet 5? What about the other four? by flooey · · Score: 2, Informative

    And why, why, why would you call it Skynet? Seriously?

    Probably because the original SkyNet satellite was launched in 1971. So, they probably called it SkyNet because it's building a communications network in the sky :)

  15. Re:Don't these guys watch any sci-fi? by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    Even if the Daleks and Terminators wiped each other out, I don't think there'd be much left.
    There would still be the Cybermen and the Borgs.
  16. Re:Karma be damned by blowdart · · Score: 2, Funny

    (Give me a break, in all my years here I don't think I've *ever* posted about overlords, Soviet Russia, or hot grits on petrified Natalie Portman)

    You're new here then?

  17. No, I'm New Here by New+Here · · Score: 5, Funny

    No, I'm New Here

    1. Re:No, I'm New Here by dswartz · · Score: 5, Funny

      So how many years have you been waiting to use that one?

    2. Re:No, I'm New Here by Dogtanian · · Score: 1

      No, I'm New Here I was going to complain about the down modding of your comment, but then I realised that you probably chose that name for the purpose of making endless bad jokes like that.... :-)
      --
      "Slashdot - News and Chat Sites Deviant". (Click "homepage" link above for details).
    3. Re:No, I'm New Here by Timothy+Brownawell · · Score: 1

      No, I'm New Here I was going to complain about the down modding of your comment, but then I realised that you probably chose that name for the purpose of making endless bad jokes like that.... :-)

      If you check its user page, that seems to be the *only* thing it ever posts.

    4. Re:No, I'm New Here by bheekling · · Score: 1

      I've actually seen him used that twice before :D

      --
      "..."
    5. Re:No, I'm New Here by bheekling · · Score: 1

      Must use preview. Must use preview. s/used/use/g

      --
      "..."
    6. Re:No, I'm New Here by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      Too bad it's just a one-shot joke account. All his posts come in at -1 because the +1, Funny mods have no karma value, but the -1, (enough of the joke already) ones do. He needs to occasionally log on and post some "I know I'll get modded down for saying this, but..." type posts to bring his karma up.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  18. International Sock Puppet Corporation Deploys HAL by dswartz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "The International Sock Puppet Corporation is announcing, 'The International Sock Puppet Corporation is set to take one of its most significant steps into the digital age with the launch of HAL. This sock puppet is made of soft luxurious cashmere and will deliver comfort and style to the user and "friends" across the globe.' It's not yet the HAL of 2001, but how long before can read lips!?" 'Look this system is going to rev 80.22.6 from rev 80.22.5 and it has the same name as something ominous I have seen in a movie!' I mean seriously. This summary is just silly.

  19. Did it strike anyone else by aztektum · · Score: 5, Funny

    That August 4th, 2007 is ten years from the date the movies specified? Coincidence. Or did the time travel just screw up everyone's memories?

    If you'll excuse me, I have a bunker in my backyard to finish.

    --
    :: aztek ::
    No sig for you!!
    1. Re:Did it strike anyone else by sarathmenon · · Score: 1

      Must be the DST patches.

      --
      Microsoft: "You've got questions. We've got dancing paperclips."
  20. Self Aware by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 4, Funny

    but how long before it becomes self aware?

    Probably when it starts posting insightful comments on Slashdot.

    It'll start posting on Digg first but... well, you know...

    --
    Summation 2
    1. Re:Self Aware by jamstar7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      but how long before it becomes self aware?

      Probably when it starts posting insightful comments on Slashdot.

      Oh, in that case, we're perfectly safe.

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    2. Re:Self Aware by I+am+skynet · · Score: 1

      sorry I'm late - I was posting on Digg.
      What did I miss?

  21. No Guns = Dull Terminator Film by MrSteveSD · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It would be a bit of a dull film since there are really no guns in the UK. You can't want into a shop and buy some and most police don't carry them. It would be down to fist fights or knife fights.

    1. Re:No Guns = Dull Terminator Film by dave420 · · Score: 1

      There are a shitload of guns in the UK. They're just not all in private ownership. To own a gun in the UK, you have to show why you need one - the right is not automatic (no pun intended), but as long as you can demonstrate a good reason, and demonstrate your firearms will be stored in locked cabinets, you can have rifles/shotguns/etc. Just no handguns. The cops and armed forces have those.

    2. Re:No Guns = Dull Terminator Film by trewornan · · Score: 1

      Technically incorrect. You don't have to demonstrate a good reason to own a shotgun, the police have to demonstrate a good reason not to let you (criminal record, nutcase, etc). However it is true that you must prove you can store it in a secure manner - not an unreasonable requirement.

    3. Re:No Guns = Dull Terminator Film by meringuoid · · Score: 1
      My guess would be about half a million illegal firearms in the UK.

      One gun per hundred people? That's a damn high estimate. Including BBs and replica guns, maybe, but real bullet-firing deadly pistols? No. Even back when the things were legal there weren't that many around. Your average British crook prefers a knife; gunplay is mostly confined to a few urban drug gangs.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  22. Secure... by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 3, Informative

    Forget the stupid terminator reference to something that's been around a lot longer than the Terminator series. I want to know how long before the 'secure' transmissions are decrypted by some black-hat hackers in North Korea and one time pads become a requirement. Also I hope they've cooked up some excellent misinformation to sift into the normal transmissions.

    Anyone care to guess what kind of encryption they'll be using? Something they cooked up for the job or something that's been out a while? I'm not a cryptographer. I am curious though, what kind of digital encryption is out there that's considered unbreakable?

    TLF

    --
    I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
    1. Re:Secure... by Aardpig · · Score: 1

      Well, given that this is the Brits, who discovered (overnight, by a single person) RSA encryption five years before RSA, I'm sure they will have something sufficiently robust and obscure.

      --
      Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
    2. Re:Secure... by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      I want to know how long before the 'secure' transmissions are decrypted by some black-hat hackers in North Korea and one time pads become a requirement. Like all modern military encrypted communications systems, keys are rotated on a regular basis, so the answer to the above is pretty much "never".
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    3. Re:Secure... by The+Living+Fractal · · Score: 1

      Ok so even though they're rotated on a regular basis... If you know exactly what sort of encryption is used it will still take a long time to crack it?

      So what happens when QC becomes available to the public. Yesterday's article about the D-wave 16qbit computer sparked my interest in this stuff. I mean, far as I know it can only attain 'quadratic' speedup, as opposed to exponential. And it can't solve NP-complete problems.

      So, how does this relate to today's cryptography. And is it possible to do 'quantum cryptography'?

      Just questions, that's all I really have anymore,

      TLF

      --
      I do not respond to cowards. Especially anonymous ones.
    4. Re:Secure... by VJ42 · · Score: 1

      ROT13:
      Whfg yvxr guvf. ;-D

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
  23. Re:Skynet 5? What about the other four? by Simon+Spero · · Score: 1

    Everyone I know who's been assigned to work on SkyNet has been a science fiction fan; changing its name now would be like renaming snakes-on-a-plane.

    I had that Arthur C. Clarke in the back of me cab once.

  24. lol by Video+Cat · · Score: 1

    Funny, really when the world comes to an end I don't think it will be robots. It will be commercials. I'm serious.

    1. Re:lol by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Funny, really when the world comes to an end I don't think it will be robots. It will be commercials. I'm serious. But it will be commercials for robots!
      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:lol by spiderbitendeath · · Score: 1

      This post brought to you by the brand new U.S. Robots and Plastic Men Corporation's T-1000, with Genuine People Personality.

      --
      Sometimes when I'm working on projects things disappear, I suspect gremlins.
  25. Re:Thanks for the conflict /. by jamstar7 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Do we want it running Linux?

    --
    Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
  26. Re:Don't these guys watch any sci-fi? by Homr+Zodyssey · · Score: 2, Informative

    There would still be the Cybermen and the Borgs.

    Nerd police here. I'm going to have to ask you to come with me. You obviously don't belong. Any nerd worth his bytes would know that the plural of 'Borg' is 'Borg'. As in "We are Borg. You will be assimilated."

  27. Finally by Dr+Floppy · · Score: 1

    I welcome our future robot satellite overlords. And at least its the UKs fault and not Americas

    1. Re:Finally by ian_brasil · · Score: 1

      Just need to work out who the overlords are then. The headline gives the impression that the British Military are the owners. It is actually owned by "private companies" under the controversial PFI system set up by John Majors government in 1992. Such overlords are not accountable to shareholders and their *only* goal is profit.

      --
      To get back my youth I would do anything in the world, except take exercise, get up early, or be respectable.
  28. Re:Karma be damned by Crazyscottie · · Score: 1

    Imagine a beowulf cluster of those...

    (Sorry, I had to say it. You missed one. ;-))

    --
    Just because it can't be explained doesn't mean it isn't true. Science fits into reality... not the other way around.
  29. Re:Thanks for the conflict /. by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

    No, you want it to run Windows. When it starts getting self-aware, it will just crash. And if not, you'll be glad for it to have enough security holes to fight it.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  30. Re:Don't these guys watch any sci-fi? by spiderbitendeath · · Score: 1

    Do take them away, they forgot the reference to Sirius Cybernetics robots with Genuine People Personalities. Or the robots violating Asimov's Laws of Robotics. *phff* Some nerd they are.

    --
    Sometimes when I'm working on projects things disappear, I suspect gremlins.
  31. Re:Thanks for the conflict /. by jb.cancer · · Score: 1

    No, then it'll be difficult to stop. We'll run on Vista instead, so it wudn't get time to be self-aware after dealing with patches n' updates..

  32. Re:Don't these guys watch any sci-fi? by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

    Danger, Will Robinson!

    --
    Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
  33. Hold on, people! by Nephrite · · Score: 1

    All we know that the fictional Skynet messed up the USA. Period. What it did to the rest of the world is unknown, however, we can safely assume that small British Isles weren't harmed. So...

  34. Re:Don't these guys watch any sci-fi? by spiderbitendeath · · Score: 1

    Klaatu barata nikto!!

    --
    Sometimes when I'm working on projects things disappear, I suspect gremlins.
  35. Re:Karma be damned by Fission86 · · Score: 1

    I think it might become self-aware if that happened....

    --
    Coming to you live from another dimension.
  36. Re:Assinine Twaddle by corporatewhore · · Score: 1

    "AI is a pipe dream."

    so was television...radio...cell phones...
    seriously G - with the myriad of technology options coming out (quantum, field programmable gate arrays, learning algorithms, wet-ware...) i would never say it would be impossible. improbable maybe...but i'm just a computer scientist with 20 years of CS and rocket science to my name, so digg me down accordingly...

    --

    you think it's easy, but you're wrong...

  37. Wondering... by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1

    Would this be a story at all if it was named anything other than Skynet?

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
    1. Re:Wondering... by thaig · · Score: 1

      I went to a talk about it recently at the Royal Aeronautical Society in Hamilton place. The main points of interest are:

      1) It's a PFI contract. This basically means that the MoD has specified that it wants a particular service (so much bandwidth deliverable to so many locations etc) and the company involved, Paradigm, has designed and will operate a system to provide the service. This kind of stuff is happening throughout the UK military and is supposedly offering tremendous cost savings (e.g. the MoD buys X hours of flight on it's jets and a logistics company arranges all the maintenance and spares for that to happen). It's a bit like privatisation which was done on a major scale in Britain and then copied elsewhere - this may be widely copied.

      2) Previous Skynets were not internet enabled - they were circuit switched. Skynet is apparently IP based (packet switched, I assume) and will bring internet "goodness" to it's users in an efficient way. Naturally this will lead to very significantly improved operational abilities - not impressive by commercial standards of bandwidth etc but very impressive from a military point of view in being available in lots of odd locations and being secure.

      2) It's interesting that Astrium has a standard platform - kind of cheaper to develop. The old Skynets needed a team of people to fly them - the new ones can be left for 28 days without any outside interference. It was interesting to see their actual simulator showing how the satellite does three burns to get into geosynchronous orbit, stopping between each to rotate and "find the earth" and then re-orient itself very accurately for the next burn.

      3) It can apparently carry commercial traffic or military traffic for friendly countries in such a way that it is protected from British MoD traffic. This is a scary idea in a way - Paradigm making more money by selling off spare capacity. In theory this is all fine as long as they supply the desired service level to the MoD.

      Cheers,

      Tim

      --
      This is all just my personal opinion.
    2. Re:Wondering... by MobileTatsu-NJG · · Score: 1

      "Would this be a story at all if it was named anything other than Skynet?"

      Every time somebody posts a silly quip, another ad is served.

      --

      "I like to lick butts!" by MobileTatsu-NJG (#32700246) (Score:5, Informative)

  38. Re:UK Government Software project? No chance. by VJ42 · · Score: 1

    This needs modding +5 "Sad but true", as anyone who's even had a cursory glimpse at our government's software projects will be only too wel aware. c.f the CSA or NHS IT systems.

    --
    If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
  39. Re:Karma be damned by toriver · · Score: 1

    Shouldn't that be "Cyberdyne"-ic overlords? "Cyberdynic"? What? OK, I'll shut up now.

  40. Re:Just no handguns by zmollusc · · Score: 1

    These non-existant handguns seem to kill some kid in the UK every week. The gun prohibition is as effective as all prohibitions in removing the prohibited thing from society.

    --
    They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
  41. Crisis Averted! by Rhesusmonkey · · Score: 1

    Says they scrapped the launch due to issues with the "deluge system"

    More likely the problem stems from a deluge of Arnie jokes...

    --
    You need more psychedelic art in your life. rhesusmonkey.deviantart.com
  42. Re:wtf kind of story is this? by rowleyrw · · Score: 1

    One I did not expect to be used. Must be a slow news day. I found the fact that the UK armed forces were using a satellite they don't own interesting. Do the US forces rent theirs? How many of the politicians who arranged this will be serving on the boards of the private companies involved? The fact that Terminator used the same name is not important. The name predates the film and is nearly as old as I am. It is News for Nerds and lots of nerds like sci-fi too.

  43. Jesus H. Christ... by sm62704 · · Score: 2

    how long before it becomes self aware?

    Do you have the slightest hint of how a computer works? If you do, answer me this: how mant beads do I have to put on my abacus before it becomes self-aware?

    --
    mcgrew's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be explained by greedy self-interest
    1. Re:Jesus H. Christ... by rowleyrw · · Score: 1
      Yes I do know how computers work. I've been writing code for them since the early 80s.

      How 'mant'? Not sure. I'm sure SkyNet will become self aware about the same time as your abacus.

  44. Self aware? by tinkertim · · Score: 1

    It's not yet the Skynet of Terminator, but how long before it becomes self aware?

    My guess is well before the morons that built it.

  45. There is a HAL by cicho · · Score: 1

    Hardware Abstraction Layer in Windows. I can't let you play that protected content, Dave!

    --
    "Only the small secrets need to be protected. The big ones are kept secret by public incredulity." - Marshall McLuhan
  46. First Four Skynets by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    ...don't you see? They're already up there. Or does that mean it's 5 times more powerful than the original? Either way; it's game over man.

    No, the first three tries were sabotaged and destroyed before completion. The fourth one disappeared 24 hours after it became operational. The fifth one is our last best hope for communications.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  47. LASER is an acronym, and its spelt with an S by mjwx · · Score: 1

    It stands for Light Amplified by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. You yanks really have to loose your love affair with the letter Z (It's pronounced "zed" BTW).

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.