Slashdot Mirror


Rocket-Powered Bionic Arm Successfully Tested

amigoro writes "A rocket-powered bionic arm has been successfully developed and tested by a team of mechanical engineers at Vanderbilt University as part of a $30 million military program to develop advanced prosthetic devices for next generation of super-soldiers."

159 comments

  1. I for one... by Q-Hack! · · Score: 2, Funny

    Welcome our new robotic overlords...

    I know, but somebody has to say it.

    --
    Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
    1. Re:I for one... by kv9 · · Score: 1

      next step: bionic ass.

    2. Re:I for one... by onearmfreak · · Score: 1

      As a guy who has one arm (not called onearmfreak for nothing), I gotta say this thing has huge cool factor on many levels. My current prosthesis has a rotating wrist, and the first two fingers and thumb are the only articulating fingers. And at that they can only "pinch". It's cool and all, but I still can't play saxophone. Have five articulated fingers would be huge. Think of all flipping-off I could do (I do drive in Detroit). I spent most of my life without any prosthesis. Growing up, hooks were the best they could do, and while some folks like em, to me they sucked huge. When can I buy one?

  2. Rocket-Propelled Bionic Arm by Eponymous+Bastard · · Score: 5, Funny

    I first read that as Rocket-Propelled Bionic Arm and thought, what's this? Mazinger Z?

    Then I read it again and, it's not much better. Off to RTFA...

    1. Re:Rocket-Propelled Bionic Arm by Mr.+Lwanga · · Score: 1

      Tranzor Z? Damn, haven't heard that in a long time.

    2. Re:Rocket-Propelled Bionic Arm by Masami+Eiri · · Score: 3, Funny

      Same thing I thought... "ROCKET PUNCH!" What's next, missile-launching bionic breasts?

    3. Re:Rocket-Propelled Bionic Arm by Sciros · · Score: 1

      Hey whatever Sigel's gotta do...

      --
      I like basketball!!1!
  3. I don't know what the rocket adds... by akpoff · · Score: 5, Funny

    but I'm sure I want one.

    1. Re:I don't know what the rocket adds... by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 5, Funny
      but I'm sure I want one.

      Surely you didn't read that in a "power enhancement" spam, did you?

      ROCKET PROPEL YOUR MANHOOD WITH BIONIC IMPLANT - As seen on TV!


    2. Re:I don't know what the rocket adds... by Xiph · · Score: 5, Informative

      then take a look at it at the original story It's actually a solid state hydrogen peroxide H2O2, it is the steam that drives powers the mechanics.
      I guess it could be considered rocketry in that it's solid to gas transition. Also, it's what the astronauts use in spacewalk jetpacks

      --
      Blah blah sig blah blah blah irony blah blah
    3. Re:I don't know what the rocket adds... by akpoff · · Score: 1

      then take a look at it at the original story
      What, and deprive other slashdotters the opportunity to post? I think not.
    4. Re:I don't know what the rocket adds... by AoT · · Score: 2, Funny

      Clearly it is the first development towards our steampunk future.

      I for one...

      Um, let's just say I like the steampunk.

    5. Re:I don't know what the rocket adds... by fractoid · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, from the sounds of it this has as much in common with rockets as it has with said spam. A rocket isn't "something that has expanding gas" or "something that uses hydrogen peroxide". A rocket is a device for producing thrust by ejecting propulsion mass. "Piston powered" would be more like it.

      Obligatory wiki link excluded since I'm sure you're all smart enough to find it. :P

      --
      Rampant carbon sequestration destroyed the Dinosaurs' tropical paradise. I'm here to help repair the damage.
    6. Re:I don't know what the rocket adds... by sjames · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It is piston driven, but there is a connection bto rocket power. The catalyst and high-test peroxide fuel mechanism were first developed for rocket propulsion (and are still used in astronaut backpacks for maneuvering).

      So it isn't literally rocket powered but it is rocket technology powered.

    7. Re:I don't know what the rocket adds... by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      Not exactly steampunk, but this reminds me of a R&D weapon in a Paranoia RPG adventure: it was a big punching glove with a few rockets around the wirst to add more punch, and a lot of explosive that the unfortunate user would discover only by using it...

    8. Re:I don't know what the rocket adds... by Oktober+Sunset · · Score: 1

      It may use steam, but as it's not made of brass nor is it powered by coal or lamp oil, I say, it's not steam punk enough. It didn't even say users need to wear goggles, big brass goggles.

  4. Efficiency, not so much by Ancient_Hacker · · Score: 1
    Rocket power sounds really keen, except it's extremely inefficient, like under 1%.

    Rocket exhaust is high-velocity, low thrust. For a mechanical arm, you need like 1/100th the velocity, and lots of thrust.

    In other words, rocket powered arms are like trying to drag race with your transmission in like 30'th gear.

    1. Re:Efficiency, not so much by Q-Hack! · · Score: 1

      I don't think rocket powered is quite correct... looks like they are using a catalyst (sp?) to convert a cold liquid into a hot gas. Then using the gas to power actuators, much like the old steam engines.

      --
      Some days I get the sinking feeling Orwell was an optimist.
    2. Re:Efficiency, not so much by GradiusCVK · · Score: 1

      "Rocket powered" doesn't seem to be a really accurate description of this device... in truth, it's closer to "steam powered". Sure, the steam is generated the same way some rockets use hydrogen peroxide to generate thrust, but the steam is not vented out of a series of small nozzles to produce thrust, but is rather fed into pistons and so forth. The valves act as an escape mechanism for the steam in the pistons, so any vented gas is not vented to produce thrust, but to reset the pistons to a relaxed state.

    3. Re:Efficiency, not so much by Eponymous+Bastard · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, but a steam engine works by steam created by boiling normal water with an external power source and using the pressure. This works by burning H2O2 which ends up producing steam and then this high-pressure steam is used. It's not external combustion. It's closer to an internal combustion engine, actually.

      I wouldn't call this a rocket, but it does seem to mix rocket engines (for high pressure gas generation) with steam engines (for harnessing high pressure gas). The closest thing I can think of is a car's air bag, quickly creating high pressure gas but not using that for propulsion. Or maybe a car's engine pushing against the pistons.

      I guess the nomenclature is the hardest part about this article.

    4. Re:Efficiency, not so much by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 4, Informative

      The term you are looking for is "Gas Generator".

      Rocket is something that generates gas (usually by combustion or decomposition) and expels it through a nozzle for thrust.

      Gas generator is generic for a device which produces gas. A boiler is a special case (heat + water). There are gas generators in airbags (solid azide chemical reaction), other industrial uses too.

      This just uses decomposing hydrogen peroxide to generate steam. Just another gas generator.

    5. Re:Efficiency, not so much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gas generator is generic for a device which produces gas.

      Rocket is something that generates gas (usually by combustion or decomposition) and expels it through a nozzle for thrust.


      I'm not trying to brag or anything, but a single Taco Bell bean burrito can shave 4 minutes off my bike ride home...

    6. Re:Efficiency, not so much by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a gas generator, you insensitive clod!

  5. I was part of the beta testing group for this arm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I used it to give myself a dutch rudder, and it was pretty good

  6. Cheesy Scifi Movies by Lucre+Lucifer · · Score: 0

    I can imagine coming across a similar title in the science fiction section at a movie store: 'Invasion of the Robots with Rocket-Powered Bionic Arms'

  7. Super Soldiers by batquux · · Score: 5, Funny
    FTA:

    a miniature rocket motor can lift (curl) about 20 to 25 pounds Wow, they'd almost be able to carry a weapon.
    1. Re:Super Soldiers by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Wow, they'd almost be able to carry a weapon.
      Or arm-wrestle a slashdotter.
  8. Fantastic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So this is why I pay my taxes every year.

  9. How steampunk by The-Bus · · Score: 4, Funny

    Goldfarb's power source is about the size of a pencil and contains a special catalyst that causes hydrogen peroxide to burn produce pure steam which is used to open and close a series of valves.

    The valves are connected to the spring-loaded joints by belts made of a special monofilament used in appliance handles and aircraft parts and a small sealed canister of hydrogen peroxide that easily fits in the upper arm can provide enough energy to power the device for 18 hours of normal activity. Does it make a choo-chooo sound when you're punching anyone?
    --

    Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.

    1. Re:How steampunk by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Does it make a choo-chooo sound when you're punching anyone?

      No ... more of a Fisssssssssssssssssss-WHAP!"

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:How steampunk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it's "na na na na na na"

    3. Re:How steampunk by mikael · · Score: 1

      When I first read the title, I thought it would enable the owner to knock someone lights out from the other side a room.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
  10. Try "rocket *fuel* powered"... by vanyel · · Score: 4, Informative

    There's no rockets involved, it's actually steam powered, fueled by rocket fuel (hydrogen peroxide).

    1. Re:Try "rocket *fuel* powered"... by skoaldipper · · Score: 3, Funny

      Hydrogen peroxide? Hmm. Novel concept. When you accidentally scrape the fur off your cat while petting it, you can simply open up an arm valve nozzle and spray the flesh wound sterile.

      --
      I hope, when they die, cartoon characters have to answer for their sins.
    2. Re:Try "rocket *fuel* powered"... by AlexBirch · · Score: 1

      You laugh at Hydrogen Peroxide now, but wait until you scrape your knee on the battlefield and you need some disinfectant.

    3. Re:Try "rocket *fuel* powered"... by TubeSteak · · Score: 4, Informative

      Picture:
      http://www.vanderbilt.edu/exploration/resources/bi onicarm_CAD-arm_800.jpg
      Caption:
      A solid model of the arm shows how it works. The propellant cartridge contains the pressurized monopropellant. The liquid is routed through two flexible lines (not shown) across the elbow join and into two catalyst packs: one for the elbow and one for the foream. The catalyst increases the effective volume of the propellant by 1000 times. The propellant does not flow continuously but is controlled and routed by the servo valves just downstream. By rotating to different positions, a servo valve routes the gas to one side or the other of a gas cylinder, pusing the piston up or down. The entire operation is computer controlled, based on force and motion feedback from the joints.

      Hydrogen peroxide + catalyst = hot gas (steam)
      Sounds to me like they're talking about a liquid fuel rocket motor.

      That pic + text was alongside the main article:
      http://www.vanderbilt.edu/exploration/processor.ph p?action=get_section_text&id=1311&r=664693

      About halfway down they get into the details of how it works & why they call it a rocket motor. Towards the bottom you can read about the engineering challenges they faced.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    4. Re:Try "rocket *fuel* powered"... by Tmack · · Score: 2, Informative

      Hydrogen peroxide? Hmm. Novel concept. When you accidentally scrape the fur off your cat while petting it, you can simply open up an arm valve nozzle and spray the flesh wound sterile.

      The high concentrate used as rocket fuel (up to 90% or better, read the early stages of http://armadilloaerospace.com/ when they were playing with this stuff) would ignite the cat on fire almost immediately on contact. Stuff that comes in the brown bottle is 1% or less usually (whitening toothpaste can be around 5%).

      Tm

      --
      Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
    5. Re:Try "rocket *fuel* powered"... by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 1

      wait until you scrape your knee on the battlefield and you need some disinfectant.

      Yeah, I did that. It hurt.

      Although I was 6 years old and I guess it was a playground... but we pretended it was a battlefield.

      And it really hurt when the school nurse put the stuff on my knee. So yeah, it was a battlefield.

      Conveniently, we also pretended to be the Bionic Man.

      --
      "Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
    6. Re:Try "rocket *fuel* powered"... by Max+Littlemore · · Score: 1

      If the title was "Rocket Fuel Powered Bionic Arm Sucessfully Tested", I would never have read the summary.

      Now that you've blown it for me, I don't think I'll bother with TFA.

      --
      I don't therefore I'm not.
    7. Re:Try "rocket *fuel* powered"... by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 1
      would ignite the cat on fire almost immediately on contact.

      --- There's a problem with that?

      Also note: the prototype auto-erotic version of this arm was involved in a tragic accident.

    8. Re:Try "rocket *fuel* powered"... by SimonInOz · · Score: 1

      Oh no, it's Arnie's arm ... must be destroyed in molten metal ...

      --
      "Cats like plain crisps"
    9. Re:Try "rocket *fuel* powered"... by TitusC3v5 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Dude...that's awesome.

      --
      And the masses cried out, "09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0!"
    10. Re:Try "rocket *fuel* powered"... by cheesee · · Score: 1

      single best thread on slashdot ever

      --
      Got Shadowrun? Awakened Worlds
  11. This is the kind of action I expect... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Bionic Commando

    Aw yeah. That's some rocket-and-bionic power right there! Did you see what he did to Hitler?

  12. Yes but by edwardpickman · · Score: 0

    can you mastrabate with it? Come on this is Slashdot, you were thinking it too.

  13. whoo! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YES! My sex life just got a lot easier! ... :(

  14. Wound't really call it a 'rocket'... by jamstar7 · · Score: 1
    FTFA, it seems to be more like a high power fuel cell:

    Goldfarb's power source is about the size of a pencil and contains a special catalyst that causes hydrogen peroxide to burn produce pure steam which is used to open and close a series of valves.

    The valves are connected to the spring-loaded joints by belts made of a special monofilament used in appliance handles and aircraft parts and a small sealed canister of hydrogen peroxide that easily fits in the upper arm can provide enough energy to power the device for 18 hours of normal activity.

    Sounds like a super fuel cell to me...

    --
    Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    1. Re:Wound't really call it a 'rocket'... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Sounds more like a complicated steam engine to me. Doesn't appear to be any electrical output ... just high pressure steam. Of course, I didn't RTFA.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    2. Re:Wound't really call it a 'rocket'... by 2short · · Score: 1

      It is not in any sense a fuel cell. Fuel cells produce electricity directly from a chemical reaction, consuming one or both reactants.

      This uses a chemical reaction to produce steam which pushes pistons. It is a steam engine. It is a very odd steam engine in that the steam is produced directly by a chemical reaction; they've replaced the usual boiler with something that is arguably a rocket.

    3. Re:Wound't really call it a 'rocket'... by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      Sounds more like a complicated steam engine to me.

      The only thing more awesome than rocket-powered cybernetics is steampunk cybernetics.

      Someone get the title changed, quick!

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
  15. Not the best idea by fishthegeek · · Score: 4, Funny

    Giving a rocket powered bionic arm to a 19 year old soldier thousands of miles away from his girlfriend? This can only end in tragedy.

    --
    load "$",8,1
    1. Re:Not the best idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Make it stop! My sides, they hurt from laughing.

  16. Time for me to get out of the military. by SC-James · · Score: 1

    So... to be a next generation super soldier, they must remove my arm?

    1. Re:Time for me to get out of the military. by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1

      So... to be a next generation super soldier, they must remove my arm?

      Hey, it worked for Edward Elric ;-)

  17. Amazing Video by fractalVisionz · · Score: 5, Informative

    Check out the video on vandy's website. I love the last few seconds where the robotic are is about to cap someone!

  18. Super? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...part of a $30 million military program to develop advanced prosthetic devices for next generation of super-soldiers

    Wars not make one great!

    1. Re:Super? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Funny

      Wars not make one great!

      But rocket-powered bionic arms do!

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
  19. Disabled vets, anyone? by graft · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Didn't it occur to anyone that the reason DARPA might be interested in this is the hundreds of vets with missing limbs who have a need for better prosthetics? The military applications of this technology seems marginal at best. I'm sure DARPA is funding all sorts of military robotics research (in fact, I know they are), but this sure as hell isn't it.

    1. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by Garridan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. The Pentagon doesn't give a shit about the vets. Don't you read the news?

    2. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      While I think it would be great for them to give soldiers some of their limbs back, if even in limited form, It seems that these appendages won't quite give them back what they once had for many years to come. How long until they can curl 50 lbs. How long until they have enough control to play video games, or type, or even just operate a remote control. Seems to me the 30 million would be better spent researching ways to stops getting into so many wars.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    3. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by icegreentea · · Score: 1

      how about for the people injured in car accidents, work place injuries, and what not? there's a whole host of reasons people may loose their limbs before you even begin comtemplating military service. i'm sure they all would like an effective prosthetic arm too.

    4. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by davester666 · · Score: 1

      Yes, in an ideal world, the military would fork out for devices such as these for soldiers who lose a limb defending their country. However, given the existing chronic underfunding of VA hospitals, these devices will NEVER be made available to the "common" soldier [as in, the guy who has to go out on patrol every day]. Those guys will still get the fibreglass arm, with the rubber band controlled hook at the end. If a device like this actually becomes practical, the only military people who would get one would be high-ranking officiers [as the military would only expend the money for a limited number of these devices]. If the military wouldn't bother to spend the money for properly armoured vehicles to prevent injuries, why would they spend megabucks on the aftermath...

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    5. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems to me that with all the difficulty the US Army has in recruiting, perhaps you're both right and wrong. Right in the sense that it's targeted at soldiers who've lost limbs in Iraq and wrong in the fact that it has tangible military benefits. It is, after all, easier to send soldiers back for another tour than to sign up new soldiers. If they're able to send experienced soldiers back into combat who would have otherwise been disqualified on account of their previous injuries, it's a definite win for the Army (though it does kinda suck for the newly-bionic soldier).

    6. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by phantomlord · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Seems to me the 30 million would be better spent researching ways to stops getting into so many wars. You do realize that emergency medicine (ie, that trauma center at your local hospital), plastic/reconstructive surgery, prosthetics, etc all have their roots in military need, don't you? If your kid is born with a facial deformity, be glad that somewhere along the line, soldiers had their face rebuilt after taking severe wounds. If you get stabbed in the park, be glad that the military devised a method of mobilizing, classifying, and treating wounds. If you get in an accident and completely shatter your foot beyond repair, be glad the military invested the R&D in amputation techniques and how to build a better lower leg.

      Replacements will eventually get better. In fact, there was a story on slashdot a couple weeks ago about a new hand, As to the person saying the military will only get such things for high ranking soldiers, the story I saw on tv was about one Sgt. Juan Arredondo. Not only not major brass, he's hispanic as well.

      Everyone has a pet project on how they'd want to spend X million dollars... and we'll never agree 100% on any expenditure. However, I feel it is our duty to return as much life back to those who volunteered to protect our lives and freedom. Also, lets be realistic, as long as people are human, they will disagree and disagreements will eventually spill over into war of some kind (be it one military against another, one gang against another or two siblings fighting that goes too far).
      --
      Don't leave your mind so open that your brain falls out. Don't close it so much that you cut off the blood.
    7. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by Nazlfrag · · Score: 1

      Indeed, they give about as much of a shit about them as they do their clusterbomb victims. Given time though, and this research should produce faster, stronger soldiers who are much more capable of severing limbs than they were before, expanding the need for the market. Soon there will be civilian versions, to cash in on the victims of the military versions, and the circle is complete. My master will be pleased.

    8. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by vandan · · Score: 1

      The military is about killing, occupying and controlling. It's got nothing to do with health care.

      Look at the way the US government STILL treats Vietnam veterans who were exposed to US chemical weapons. Or previous / current Iraq veterans who've been exposed to chemical and nuclear weapons. They categorically deny the existence of the problem - deny use of the weapons, and deny the problems that they've cause. In light of this, I don't see any medical applications being pursued, apart from possibly giving business leaders and stooges like Dubya limbs back after someone bombs them off ( not that I'm recommending anyone commit such an atrocity ).

    9. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by vandan · · Score: 1

      You do realize that emergency medicine (ie, that trauma center at your local hospital), plastic/reconstructive surgery, prosthetics, etc all have their roots in military need, don't you? If your kid is born with a facial deformity, be glad that somewhere along the line, soldiers had their face rebuilt after taking severe wounds. If you get stabbed in the park, be glad that the military devised a method of mobilizing, classifying, and treating wounds. If you get in an accident and completely shatter your foot beyond repair, be glad the military invested the R&D in amputation techniques and how to build a better lower leg.

      That all sounds very good, but is completely wrong.

      Doctors, when faced with medical problems, strive to find solutions. Our initial knowledge of anatomy came from doctors disecting deceased people, to see how they tick. Some ... a VERY small percentage ... of this knowledge came from the battlefield. An overwhelming majority did NOT come from the battlefield, but from universities.

      Also, lets be realistic, as long as people are human, they will disagree and disagreements will eventually spill over into war of some kind

      Not at all. Capitalism, and in particular Imperialism is driving all the wars on the planet, in one form or another. Even the stupid tribal wars in Africa can be traced back to a bunch of capitalists who want to profit from selling arms and generally sticking their nose ( and capital ) where's it's not wanted. The Middle East is of course the most obvious example of imperialist meddling leading to wars. Individuals - even large groups of them - have no interest in war. People want to solve their problems in constructive ways, that benefit everyone. It's the capitalists who use massive armies and WOMD to enforce their will.
    10. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by phantomlord · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Doctors, when faced with medical problems, strive to find solutions. Our initial knowledge of anatomy came from doctors disecting deceased people, to see how they tick. Some ... a VERY small percentage ... of this knowledge came from the battlefield. An overwhelming majority did NOT come from the battlefield, but from universities.

      It's hard to find solutions when you don't have a fresh stream of people in the right place at the right time to try them out on. Certainly, you wouldn't argue that a 10 year old with a facial scar from a car accident when she was 3 is the person to do initial experiments with plastic surgery on. Guys who are missing half of their face from a shrapnel wound? Good choice.

      Prior to the Civil War, armies didn't really try to set up field hospitals where they could perform on-site diagnosis, triage and surgery facing a wide array of potentially fatal, somewhat random wounds. They treated everything from burns to gangrene to shattered bones in those hospitals. Morbidity post-amputation was pretty high and that's where sterilization procedures started coming into play. Where do you think the system of roving medics who triage wounds and stabilize patients en-route to doctors (like EMTs/ambulances/helicopters rushing you to the hospital) comes from?

      a mini PBS documentary of some of the history of medicine and the military. I've seen lots of stuff on the History Channel as well. There are a LOT of books and other information out there describing the advances made in medicine because of warfare. If you think we'd be where we are without those sacrifices, you'd be very mistaken. Pick up a book, pretty much any book on the subject, and educate yourself before you go off spouting that scientists/doctors will make advances at the rate they have without patients to work on.

      Not at all. Capitalism, and in particular Imperialism is driving all the wars on the planet, in one form or another. Even the stupid tribal wars in Africa can be traced back to a bunch of capitalists who want to profit from selling arms and generally sticking their nose ( and capital ) where's it's not wanted. The Middle East is of course the most obvious example of imperialist meddling leading to wars. Individuals - even large groups of them - have no interest in war. People want to solve their problems in constructive ways, that benefit everyone. It's the capitalists who use massive armies and WOMD to enforce their will.

      Check your history... Everyone has an ancestor who has been involved in war. It doesn't matter if they were from Athens, Egypt, Russia, Peru or Japan. Everyone fights at some time and you're ignorant if you think it's always pure capitalism at heart. My farm dries up while my neighbor has more water than he can use but refuses to share. It is capitalism for me to go steal his water to keep my family from dying? Only if that is the prism that you look at the entire world through. Wars were fought over the eye of a woman (see Helen of Troy... yes, mythology but mythology is often based in historical fact to convey a lesson). Siblings fight over the attention of their parents. Some people will kill each other still just because of the color of their skin.

      Very few people actually like and support full scale war... but, it is the one thing guaranteed to provide a solution to a problem. Diplomacy can never work without a military to enforce it and if someone refuses diplomacy and keeps attacking you, you have no choice but to force them into surrender.

      Now... since you seem to be in the camp that the US shouldn't stick its nose into other people's business, do you also agree we have no business going into Darfur, had no business in Kosovo, Somalia, etc? Or do you mean we have no business meddling in other people's affairs unless it is something you, in particular, approve of? I know quite a few people who have an inte

      --
      Don't leave your mind so open that your brain falls out. Don't close it so much that you cut off the blood.
    11. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      Seems to me the 30 million would be better spent researching ways to stops getting into so many wars. Please. 30 million wouldn't even fund a simple study to figure out what to look at, much less produce any meaningful results. Besides we already know why we get into so many wars, and it's not something that lends itself to being stopped with money. Humans sometimes resort to violence to get what they want. It's part of our nature. Any idiot who thinks we can "change our violent culture" and thereby make war not happen has an abysmally poor understanding of the effect of millions of years of evolutionary pressure from a very dangerous, violent world.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    12. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1

      The military is about killing, occupying and controlling. It's got nothing to do with health care. Sure it does. Unhealthy soldiers are not as effective at killing, occupying, and controlling. Nearly all of our emergency medical treatment techniques come straight out of war, from the army medical corps.
      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    13. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by vandan · · Score: 1

      There are a LOT of books and other information out there describing the advances made in medicine because of warfare. If you think we'd be where we are without those sacrifices, you'd be very mistaken.

      I'm still not convinced. You're saying that some medical technology was developed in a wartime environment. I'm not disputing that. BUT, war is an incredibly inefficient way to develop medical technology. You're far better off skipping the war, and directly investing in health care and medical research. So when you say we owe a debt to war for the medical technology we have, I still argue that we'd have BETTER medical technology if the money we spent on war were put to better use.

      Check your history... Everyone has an ancestor who has been involved in war.

      Wars of old were over some pretty stupid things, yes. But these are subsiding, and being replaced by imperialist wars. Forget ancient mythology. Check out the past century.
      My farm dries up while my neighbor has more water than he can use but refuses to share. It is capitalism for me to go steal his water to keep my family from dying?
      Good example. Under capitalism, your neighbor is quite within their rights to refuse to share 'their' water with you. You starve, or you fight. That's all that capitalism offers. Under socialism, there is no such thing as 'your' water or 'their' water, as water is a shared natural resource. If you need water, you get it from the state, and the state may then go and get it from your neighbor.

      Some people will kill each other still just because of the color of their skin.

      Not without being stirred up by some ultra-conservative arse-wipe first though. It's important to keep that in mind.

      Very few people actually like and support full scale war... but, it is the one thing guaranteed to provide a solution to a problem.

      On the contrary, it's the only thing guaranteed to NOT provide a solution. You see, there's no peace without justice. And justice is not distributed by the strongest army - it's achieved by human negotiation and compassion. I deeply pity you if you see war as the only solution to the world's problems. I also hope you never get in a position of any power ( karma ensures that people who abuse power in one life very rarely get access to power again ).

      and if someone refuses diplomacy and keeps attacking you, you have no choice but to force them into surrender

      Sure. Now apply that to every war the US has engaged in, EVER. Start with the most recent large-scale effort: Iraq. Exactly who attacked who? You're arguing ( and I agree with you here ) that Iraq has the right to use whatever force necessary to prevent the US from continuing to attack them.

      Now... since you seem to be in the camp that the US shouldn't stick its nose into other people's business, do you also agree we have no business going into Darfur, had no business in Kosovo, Somalia, etc?

      Precisely! I remember a documentary on Kosovo after the US 'liberation'. A girl was saying that her friends and family were all dead, her village destroyed, and her life in ruins - all thanks to the US carpet-bombing Kosovo. She was asked if she was grateful to the US for 'liberating' her, and she laughed, and said, "Absolutely not. I'm glad that the fighting is finally over, but if the US ever again wants to liberate us with their bombs, please tell them - we don't want or need their help". There are 3 key points to issues like this:

      1) When you have a war between 2 sides, and then a HUGE power comes in with OVERWHELMING force, nothing of the original CAUSE of the war is addressed. The powerful force wipes all sides off the battlefield indiscriminately, takes what it can of the natural resources, and sets up a puppet government. I need not remind you of how

    14. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by dashyaoo · · Score: 1

      nice work by dashyaoo test 1

    15. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by cortex · · Score: 3, Informative

      I am a member of the Univ. of Utah team working on the neural control part of the DARPA revolutionizing prosthetics projects. I can tell you definitively that this project is solely aimed at helping injured veterans. They have made a point of having the scientists and engineers working on this project meet people who have lost limbs while serving their country. It was very moving and motivational to meet these soldiers in person. I am pretty sure that the technology will also be made available to civilian amputees. The people I have met from the Pentagon do care a great deal about the lives and welfare of the people serving in the military, as well as all people in general.

    16. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by phantomlord · · Score: 1

      I'm still not convinced. You're saying that some medical technology was developed in a wartime environment. I'm not disputing that. BUT, war is an incredibly inefficient way to develop medical technology. You're far better off skipping the war, and directly investing in health care and medical research. So when you say we owe a debt to war for the medical technology we have, I still argue that we'd have BETTER medical technology if the money we spent on war were put to better use.

      And yet, you'll sit there and argue out of ignorance because you choose to so you don't have to question your internal biases. Entire fields of medicine were developed and refined because of war medical needs; Emergency medicine being one of the most important. But hey, triage, stabilization and evacuation techniques would have developed all on their own decades earlier if it wasn't for a military needing with hundreds of soldiers being wounded.

      Wars of old were over some pretty stupid things, yes. But these are subsiding, and being replaced by imperialist wars. Forget ancient mythology. Check out the past century. My farm dries up while my neighbor has more water than he can use but refuses to share. It is capitalism for me to go steal his water to keep my family from dying? Good example. Under capitalism, your neighbor is quite within their rights to refuse to share 'their' water with you. You starve, or you fight. That's all that capitalism offers. Under socialism, there is no such thing as 'your' water or 'their' water, as water is a shared natural resource. If you need water, you get it from the state, and the state may then go and get it from your neighbor.

      And where does the state get the water from? Oh yeah, forced coercion of your neighbor. Give us your water to give to everyone else and we won't throw you in jail, charge you with crimes against humanity and the state, and maybe we'll let you keep some for yourself. Oh, and he better dig another well while he's at it so they can get some more water off the fruit of his labor while his neighbor sits on his ass complaining he's thirsty. Humans are inherently self-centered. They will protect their family first before they aid the town on the other side of the county, the city in another state and the country on another continent. We aren't ants and the flaw of communism and similar models is they expect us to not be human. Again, you are letting your own anti-capitalism bias cloud your judgment.

      Some people will kill each other still just because of the color of their skin. Not without being stirred up by some ultra-conservative arse-wipe first though. It's important to keep that in mind.

      It's gotta be a conservative, right? Why, damn that David Duke for going out to LA back in 1992 and stirring up the blacks so they would go attack the Koreans. Screw that neo-con Abbie Hoffman and the others who incited the 1968 Chicago riots. The Black Panthers? Rush Limbaugh's personal attack squad.

      Very few people actually like and support full scale war... but, it is the one thing guaranteed to provide a solution to a problem. On the contrary, it's the only thing guaranteed to NOT provide a solution. You see, there's no peace without justice. And justice is not distributed by the strongest army - it's achieved by human negotiation and compassion. I deeply pity you if you see war as the only solution to the world's problems. I also hope you never get in a position of any power ( karma ensures that people who abuse power in one life very rarely get access to power again ).

      I didn't say war was the only, nor the best, solution to every problem... I said that war is the one thing that is guaranteed to be a solution to every problem. Fact is, violence solves problems. That bully that harassed you in school? If you would have punched him in the nose, he would have left you alone... Whining to your parents just made him laugh at you and encouraged him more. Some

      --
      Don't leave your mind so open that your brain falls out. Don't close it so much that you cut off the blood.
    17. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by e2d2 · · Score: 1

      Working at Walter Reed for a while during the main Afghanistan operations I can state with confidence that your statement is simply not true. I'm not arguing that there aren't problems with the VA and veterans care, but that does not mean that the military doesn't care about vets. Not caring would be telling them to fuck off when they get injured.

      Who does more research into Neuro-science and prosthetics than the DOD? They tend to have a lot of spinal/head injury victims/amputees and hence do a lot of work in those fields. A lot of our modern medicine was perfected on the battle field, this is no different.

    18. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by vandan · · Score: 1

      And where does the state get the water from? Oh yeah, forced coercion of your neighbor.

      Hardly. A society run properly won't run out of water, so your point here is abstract in the extreme. But if you want to push it, then yes, resources would be shared - by force if necessary.

      Humans are inherently self-centered. They will protect their family first before they aid the town on the other side of the county, the city in another state and the country on another continent. We aren't ants and the flaw of communism and similar models is they expect us to not be human. Again, you are letting your own anti-capitalism bias cloud your judgment.

      If you stop foaming at the mouth long enough to listen to yourself, you'll realise that it's YOU letting your bias cloud your judgement. No-one other than YOU is insisting that socialism is about treating people like ants. It's about collective, democratic planning. Nothing more, nothing less. Your holier-than-thou capitalism is about greed, profit and exploitation. People, when given the choice, will take democracy over exploitation any day.

      It's gotta be a conservative, right?

      You are showing your lack of political knowledge here. Racism is a tool of the conservatives. All radicals oppose racism. When did you come down again?

      Fact is, violence solves problems.

      So you beat your boyfriend then?

      Talking is fine and dandy... but agreements are meaningless if they don't have an enforcement mechanism. Why are UN resolutions a total farce? Because they have no means of enforcing them.

      Because the UN is merely a tool of the imperialist powers, and can't manage to come to any reasonable resolution on anything. It's totally irrelevant, as Dubya says. It's only there to collect the hopes of people who realise there's a worldwide problem, and need some grand body to look up to and say, "The UN will do something".

      Under your little utopian land, what do you do when the neighbor still refuses to share his water? Oh yeah, send the goons to go take it from him.

      Are you a teenager, or have you carried your arrogance with you into your twenties? Firstly, socialism has very little to do with the utopian movement. You do realise that, don't you? And secondly, it's not 'little'. Thirdly, we've already come to realise that a lack of water ( and all other necessities of life ) is a feature of capitalism, so I really don't see what point you're trying to get to here. In 'my little utopian land', as you so bitterly put it, there would be no lack of water, because we'd have far better planning, and water wouldn't be wasted to extraordinary degrees in industrial madness, such as using drinking water for cooling power plants, separating ores in mines, etc. Industry would be using recycled water. I wouldn't give a toss about what water my neighbour is using, because I'd already have what I need. Is this beyond your comprehension?

      Iraq was in violation of its terms of surrender with the United States

      That's absolute bullshit. Saddam was supported by the US prior to the 1st invasion, and also after the 1st invasion. If the US was so upset about this so-called 'violation', then they should have stopped supporting him. His actions were never the responsibility of the rest of Iraq; in fact the only people responsible for Saddams actions were Saddam, and the West. So when you take this violation of Saddam's terms of surrender, and use it as justification for invading Iraq and killing a million or so civilians, you are supporting a war crime.

      As for Iraq fighting us, the leadership and supply chain isn't Iraqi, it's mostly Iranian.

      This is a meaningless complaint. Firstly, they're all Persian. Iraq and Iran are We

    19. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by Garridan · · Score: 1

      Good to hear from two sources... but not what I've heard from the boys I know. Hope to hell that you're right.

    20. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hardly. A society run properly won't run out of water, so your point here is abstract in the extreme. But if you want to push it, then yes, resources would be shared - by force if necessary.

      Which negates your point that capitalism is flawed because it requires force to restrict the resources. Which is more immoral, keeping others from taking the fruits of your work without your consent or forcing someone at gun point to give up the fruits of their labor?

      If you stop foaming at the mouth long enough to listen to yourself, you'll realise that it's YOU letting your bias cloud your judgement. No-one other than YOU is insisting that socialism is about treating people like ants. It's about collective, democratic planning. Nothing more, nothing less. Your holier-than-thou capitalism is about greed, profit and exploitation. People, when given the choice, will take democracy over exploitation any day.

      Collective democratic planning = Animal Farm... and lets not mix words, what you want is communism (community ownership and distribution of everything), not socialism (state ownership of the means of the production without the equitable distribution). And the problem is, someone has to be in charge of deciding who gets what and that makes a second class of people. While North Koreans starve, Kim Jong Il enjoys a variety of western entertainment, just spent $20 million on a boat load of Mercedes cars, eats delicacies all the time, etc. Similarly, you never saw Lenin waiting for bread like the rest of his "equal" countrymen.

      You are showing your lack of political knowledge here. Racism is a tool of the conservatives. All radicals oppose racism. When did you come down again?

      And yet you totally ignore the examples of leftist racism that I provided.

      Are you a teenager, or have you carried your arrogance with you into your twenties? Firstly, socialism has very little to do with the utopian movement. You do realise that, don't you? And secondly, it's not 'little'. Thirdly, we've already come to realise that a lack of water ( and all other necessities of life ) is a feature of capitalism, so I really don't see what point you're trying to get to here. In 'my little utopian land', as you so bitterly put it, there would be no lack of water, because we'd have far better planning, and water wouldn't be wasted to extraordinary degrees in industrial madness, such as using drinking water for cooling power plants, separating ores in mines, etc. Industry would be using recycled water. I wouldn't give a toss about what water my neighbour is using, because I'd already have what I need. Is this beyond your comprehension?

      I'm probably older than you are... and I've only ever known socialists and communists to believe in utopia. Everyone else is far too pragmatic and realizes the shortcomings of human nature.

      As for your utopia never lacking water, well... I sure hope you never have a drought (or did you magically solve climate control when you created utopia?). I hope you never face a flood (which contaminates all of your water). I hope you never face an earthquake (which can disrupt all of your supply lines). I hope you never get invaded (because if you aren't funding a defensive military, your ass will get run over faster than GWB at a Kos convention). But hey, central planning overcomes every problem. Talk about the epitome of arrogance.

      That's absolute bullshit. Saddam was supported by the US prior to the 1st invasion, and also after the 1st invasion. If the US was so upset about this so-called 'violation', then they should have stopped supporting him. His actions were never the responsibility of the rest of Iraq; in fact the only people responsible for Saddams actions were Saddam, and the West. So when you take this violation of Saddam's terms of surrender, and use it as justification for invading Iraq and killing a million or so civilians, you are supporting a war crim

    21. Re:Disabled vets, anyone? by vandan · · Score: 1

      Which is more immoral, keeping others from taking the fruits of your work without your consent or forcing someone at gun point to give up the fruits of their labor?

      No need to get hysterical about people being robbed at gunpoint ... this is a feature of capitalism, not socialism. Under capitalism, the workers create all the wealth, and are paid a bare minimum - just enough to feed themselves and their families. So NOW, the fruits of our labour is being stolen from us. What socialists aim to do is put an end to that, and to give ordinary people equal voting rights in deciding how society's wealth is distributed. Your repeated contention that people will be robbed of the 'fruits of their labour' is ridiculous and unfounded. It's no good just repeating what you hear, even if you've heard it many times before. You have to think about what you're saying, and if it doesn't add up, then stop saying it.

      Collective democratic planning = Animal Farm

      I see no reason why. Simply saying it's so doesn't make it so. You need to think, sir, THINK!

      imilarly, you never saw Lenin waiting for bread like the rest of his "equal" countrymen.

      Lenin lived a very modest life. Considering he was the backbone of the Bolshevik party, it wouldn't exactly make sense for him to starve, now would it? Also keep in mind that Lenin tried desperately to pull Russia out of WWI. It was the war, and not any malice on the part of Lenin or the Bolsheviks that led to mass starvation. It's also important to point out that Lenin had no material property to speak of, no business, no capital . This is a far cry from the capitalist rulers of the world. You seem to be blind to this. Why?

      As for your utopia never lacking water, well... I sure hope you never have a drought

      The problem with lack of water isn't lack of rain, it's lack of planning. For example, here in Australia we are ( finally ) starting to address the issue, by building solar-powered desalination plants. What's so hard about that? THINK! I also noted that heavy industry is a major consumer of drinking water, when they could be using recycled water. THINK! You see, the problem is that the 'market' doesn't provide these solutions, because there is no monetary gain for the ruling class in these solutions. They'd rather see water restrictions, and have idiots like you claim that the 'reds under the bed' want to steal YOUR water. But only socialists consistently argue for a planned economy, part of which would be planning how drinking water is supplied to people who need to drink, and recycled water is supplied to heavy industry who don't require pristine quality water. Only socialists argue for zero-environmental-impact solutions such as solar-powered desalinations plants ( we're very proud of this achievement in NSW ). THINK!

      1) Yep... that's how we knew for sure that he had WMD.

      Right. So why should anyone trust that there's been a change of heart, and that you're now against WOMD? Hint: no-one does. Also, you didn't know for sure that he had WOMD, because as we now know, he DIDN'T. One of the other things Howard ( the Iraq war veteran, not the Australian terrorist ) was saying was that LONG before he reached Baghdad, he was told to remove all his chemical-weapons-resistant suits, his gas masks, etc, because the army knew there were no WOMD, and the suits were impairing the operation of soldiers. There is overwhelming evidence that the WOMD lies were known to be lies before the initial invasions. Get over it. You were lied to, and you believed it.

      2) Really? Care to provide documentation saying everything was destroyed because nobody else can.

      No I don't, actually. You see, you can't prove a negative. Have you ever considered the i

  20. What rocket? by peacefinder · · Score: 1

    There is a catalytic heat and steam source using hydrogen peroxide as fuel, but I can't find a rocket anywhere in TFA other than in the headline.

    --
    With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
  21. for 3 million dollars I bet it..... by 3seas · · Score: 1

    ....packs a helluva punch

  22. Yes but.... by hax0r_this · · Score: 1

    Does it run Linux?

    1. Re:Yes but.... by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 1

      And can you make a beowulf cluster out of them? ;-)

    2. Re:Yes but.... by Mr+Jazzizle · · Score: 1

      ...a beowulf cluster of linux-running rocket-powered masturbating bionic arms? *welcomes overlords*

  23. Or did you mean to welcome... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    "... our new robot underarms?"

  24. Remember Lexx! by Ego · · Score: 1

    Does anyone else see the potential downfall to this? I mean, surely this will lead to an army of rocket powered bionic arms that self-replicate, and eventually consume this entire universe, thus causing it to implode? Sure, we can rely on the potential to slip into the other universe, but are we ready to take that gamble?

    1. Re:Remember Lexx! by UncleTogie · · Score: 1

      Ask Von Neumann... ;)

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    2. Re:Remember Lexx! by Ego · · Score: 1

      We're all doomed I tell you!

    3. Re:Remember Lexx! by Adambomb · · Score: 1

      Good.

      --
      Ice Cream has no bones.
  25. Bionic Commando? by Captain+Jack+Taylor · · Score: 1

    First thing I thought of when I heard "military" and "rocket powered bionics". It's not actually a rocket, but a steam-powered bionic arm is hella badass too! Auto-mail?

  26. Dear Military, by Strange+Ranger · · Score: 1

    If there ever comes a time when I only have one arm, please don't send me (back) into battle.

    Thanks so much.

    A Super Soldier should have all his/her parts still attached. The other path leads to the Dark Side.

    Thanks again.

    --

    Operator, give me the number for 911!
  27. The potential for (self) harm... by ricebowl · · Score: 1

    I can't help but wonder if this is like the idea of the seven-league boots; that, in one stride, allow the wearer to travel (classically) 21 miles or (Roman) 10.5 miles. Groin strain seems the inevitable corollary to this. Oddly enough, from the earlier comments, it seems that's the presumed outcome of this development too...

    We should all stop to think for a moment: just because we can, should we? Won't anyone think of the soldiers?

  28. Actual power source better than headline by ThanatosMinor · · Score: 1

    I much prefer the idea of a steam-powered bionic arm than a rocket-powered one. I myself would like to see someone typing on the steampunk keyboard at breakneck speeds with such an arm. Rocket-powered arms are better for breaking things, though.

    1. Re:Actual power source better than headline by Bloodoflethe · · Score: 1

      I am going to have to design something like this now. Damn you!

      --
      "Little is much when little you need."
  29. Yes, it's a steam engine. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Sounds more like a complicated steam engine to me.

    I did RTFA - at least the first level.

    Yes, it's a steam engine. (The steam is switched through valves and pushes on pistons to achieve motion.)

    Not a rocket. (No blast of burning gases out an opening causing motion by recoil.)

    Not a fuel-cell or even a steam generator. (The steam powers the motion directly by pressure, not indirectly by driving a generator to power an electric motor.)

    So we now have a working steampunk / gaslamp fantasy robot arm.

    Wonder if that's how "Mr Tock" worked. B-)

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Yes, it's a steam engine. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Make that:

      Wonder if that's how "Mr Tock" worked. B-)

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  30. Synthetic Actin/Myosin? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    What is the energy efficiency of the actin/myosin that powers animal muscles?

    And what is the efficiency of driving those proteins with mechanical force to produce energy? Can that energy be harvested as electrons or photons, rather than just reversing the ATP hydrolysis that usually powers their mechanics?

    And finally, what's the lifecycle efficiency of manufacturing synthetic actin/myosin fibers and the energetics infrastructure to power them, or be powered by them?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Synthetic Actin/Myosin? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's wrong with using oil?

    2. Re:Synthetic Actin/Myosin? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      The problem with oil is that it will last forever, it's healthy, and the nicest people in the world want us to have as much as we want.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    3. Re:Synthetic Actin/Myosin? by Climate+Shill · · Score: 1

      What is the energy efficiency of the actin/myosin that powers animal muscles?

      About 60%

      And what is the efficiency of driving those proteins with mechanical force to produce energy?

      About zero.

      Can that energy be harvested as electrons or photons

      Yes, but it's zero :-)

    4. Re:Synthetic Actin/Myosin? by Climate+Shill · · Score: 1

      Your mention of photons gives me an idea, though. If you wanted electrical power from the body, it would probably be much easier to make a luminescent power source biocompatible than a more direct electrical one, and also probably more efficient. The efficiency of firefly tails is apparently 90%, and the light is reasonably hot and a good match for GaAsP single gap cells, so maybe 70% for the whole device.

      There is the slight snag that fireflies are suspected to not be mammals, so you might need a bit of genetic engineering before trying any transplants. Still, nothing our fine Mad Scientists can't take in their stride.

    5. Re:Synthetic Actin/Myosin? by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Why is the mechanical->chemical/electrical(/photonic) efficiency of those proteins "zero"? I've got to think they would at least produce heat if driven "backwards" rather than ATP-powered motion. And that heat could be collected at low efficiency for powering another process.

      Why wouldn't driving them backwards produce energy that could be absorbed in an endothermic chemical reaction, even if the cell's cytokinetics are too complex to actually attach a phosphate to ADP?

      --

      --
      make install -not war

  31. A robotic arm? by PPH · · Score: 1
    An arm? Just one? Why not a pair? What is it that one could use a single arm for anyway?

    Err, umm.....Never mind. Forget I asked.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  32. OB Rocket in your pocket by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Is that a rocket you are hugging me with or are you just happy to see me?"

  33. In a possibly related story... by suitepotato · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...Vanderbilt University reported a work-related injury to the OSHA wherein an employee who is as yet unidentified was seriously injured in his groin. Confidential sources say there was a lot of blood and a violently ripped off body part involved. We await further news on this development.

    --
    If my grammar and spelling are off, I am [distracted/tired/careless] (take your pick)
    1. Re:In a possibly related story... by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      ...Vanderbilt University reported a work-related injury to the OSHA wherein an employee who is as yet unidentified was seriously injured in his groin. Confidential sources say there was a lot of blood and a violently ripped off body part involved. We await further news on this development.

      I bet his thesis advisor now regrets telling him to 'get a grip'...

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
  34. The pissed off Iraqis might do it for you. by FatSean · · Score: 1

    Shame this gear won't be ready (or funded) for the guys returning from Iraq RIGHT NOW.

    They just get moldy 'recovery rooms' and a pat on the back for their service in an optional police action.

    --
    Blar.
  35. Ralph Cramden wants one!! by Pyrroc · · Score: 1

    This is what he was thinking when he said "One of these days Alice.... Bang, Zoom, to the Moon!"

    --
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
  36. oblig. "Army of Darkness Quote"... by Dusty101 · · Score: 1

    Groovy!

    PS: Amusingly, the Captcha word for this submission is "backhand"...

  37. I'll pass by asm2750 · · Score: 1

    I would rather wait for military grade Nitinol/Flexinol Muscle Wires http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_wire. But I bet we are decades from good performance with this kind of technology since its temperature dependent.

  38. Acme labs? by Lisandro · · Score: 1

    Sounds like something Willie E. Coyote would design. That is, if we had no prior art on the subject...

  39. yikes inflation sucks by hurfy · · Score: 1

    Anyone else plug the six-million dollar man into an inflation calculator and scare themselves ;) If you back up a year or two to the book it is spot on :)

  40. Heatguy J by Nicky+G · · Score: 1

    This sounds like a precursor to the android technology in the anime Heatguy J. Sweeeet! Occasionally the cyborg J has to let off steam when he's been using a lot of power.

  41. The Vanderbilt site has video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Vanderbilt Exploration website has video of the arm in action.

    http://www.vanderbilt.edu/exploration/stories/bion icarm.html

  42. ouch by CircularHowler · · Score: 1

    What if it scorches me when i beat off?

  43. Bad Move by DynaSoar · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The Army prefers not to put powered vehicles on the front line because
    (1) they require refueling, and fuel is a supply/logistics problem, and
    (2) they make noise, and
    (3) being mechanical, they break.

    Loading up each soldier with enough H2O2 to get through the day would require stocking and maintaining equipment for this stuff. Running out of H2O2 before you can get refueled will result in removing the equipment so it won't detract from action, and that will result in soldiers abandoning it rather than run around burdened by something they can't use.

    Sitting around making a hissing noise makes one a target even in the dark.

    Putting a non-combatant like a mechanic/armorer on the front line is a bad idea because they can get killed, leaving you with useless armor. If this happens, or if it breaks and you don't send a mechanic/armorer because they're a burden themselves, it will result in the same abandoning noted above. Electrical devices break down less than mechanical and make them more likely to be adopted and used.

    If H2O2/catalyst devices are capable of producing sufficient power, they'd be being developed for use in fuel cells (which still requires the rear line placement), which could recharge battery powered armor (which doesn't have near the other problems). To be efficient it would require high purity stuff, which is hard to produce, and requires difficult and expensive maintenance no matter how far back it's made and stored. Even so, it'd be better from a logistic and tactical stand point to develop hydrogen based fuel cells to charge battery powered armor, running off the hydrogen from the fuels they're already going to be carting around -- unleaded, diesel and JP4/8.

    --
    "I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
    1. Re:Bad Move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Army prefers not to put powered vehicles on the front line because Unless it's a rocket powered... err. well... rocket.
  44. "Rocket"? by clekosrule · · Score: 1

    When I saw the word "rocket", I imagined a reaction engine of some sort. Like, a rocket nozzle sticking out of the forearm. The actual design is of course a lot more reasonable, but the "rocket" moniker is a bit misleading, and I suspect it was there just to sound fancy. :/

  45. Nope, you're the first. by Scrameustache · · Score: 2, Informative

    Didn't it occur to anyone that the reason DARPA might be interested in this is the hundreds of vets with missing limbs who have a need for better prosthetics? CARL: I got Games & Theory.

    CARMEN: Games & Theory? That's Military Intelligence... Oh, Carl!

    JOHNNY: Whoa Way to go, boy-yo!

    RECRUITING SERGEANT: Next time we meet, I'll probably have to salute you. What about you, son?

    JOHNNY: Infantry, sir.

    RECRUITING SERGEANT: Well, good for you. The Mobile Infantry made me the man I am today.
    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  46. Internal combustion steam engine. by argent · · Score: 1

    It's not a reaction engine, so it's not a rocket. It's an expansion engine... the same basic principle as any gasoline or steam engine, with the working fluid being steam generated from internal combustion.

  47. Somebody get Phil Foglio on the line. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The 'Vanderbilt' university even sounds like one of Foglio's ideas.

    I love it when fact and fiction meet in the middle!

    Read Girl Genius! A fine comic about, as Phil puts it, "Romance and Adventure in the Steam Age."

  48. steampunk arm by technoCon · · Score: 1

    wouldn't it be a more accurate headline to say, "steam powered bionic arm successfully tested" ?

  49. HEY! LOOK AT BENDER! I'M BEING ENTERTAINiNG! by Spokehedz · · Score: 4, Funny

    Bite my shiny, rocket-powered, metal ass!

    Ha-hahahaha!

    1. Re:HEY! LOOK AT BENDER! I'M BEING ENTERTAINiNG! by LifesABeach · · Score: 1

      I can not help but think about the what applications could be created, and tested; If the Pron industry started to get D.O.D. funding on certain projects. But considering the money to be made in the Porn industry, what if the rolls were reversed?

  50. Bionic Arms = THE POWER LOADER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The Queen spins at the sound of door motors behind her. The parting doors REVEAL an inhuman silhouette standing there.

    Ripley steps out, WEARING TWO TONS OF HARDENED STEEL. THE POWER LOADER. Like medieval armor with the power of a bulldozer. She takes a step...the massive foot CRASH-CLANGS to the deck. She takes another, advancing.

    "RIPLEY: Get away from her, you b?tch!"

    I can see it now...sweet.

  51. ok so it's not rocket power it's Steam Punk by infonography · · Score: 1

    Sadly can't read the article it's /.'ed The fluff piece wasn't interesting, maybe I will read the Vanderbilt on later.

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
  52. Reminds me of the phrase by Arceliar · · Score: 1

    The Iron Fist of War

  53. Video link by ZDRuX · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's the link to the video which shows the arm in action and talks a little about how it is made.

    --
    The magical number is: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  54. Steam powered, not rocket powered. by camperdave · · Score: 2, Informative

    This is a steam powered artificial limb. It has nothing to do with rocket power (thrust produced by ejecting reaction mass) other than the fuel.

    --
    When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
  55. wrong limb by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When it comes to combining rockets and human limbs, well, somehow in that context "rocket" really says "penis" more than "arm" to me...

  56. Now for the bio-engineered solder ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    with special peroxide generating organ.

  57. Kinda Weak by PenGun · · Score: 1

    I'm sure it is useful for the handicapped but my arms are considerably stronger than the RPA and I'm 60.

  58. Nothing to do with Super Soldiers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I really resent the implication that this research is being done to create 'super soldiers'.

    Clearly this technology is working to get to the level where it could replace a fully functioning human arm. Why would the military want such a device when the human arm is still better?

    Gosh, probably because a lot of troops are losing limbs in Iraq/Afghanistan, and the military is trying to take care of them. This is not a new idea, the military has always been on the cutting edge of prosthetics because unfortunately they are some of the biggest users of prosthetic limbs.

    Most of the people who receive these limbs will still be medically discharge, which some rare exceptions, so this research is not designed to return wounded warriors to the line of fire, it instead designed to take care of those who have been forced to sacrifice a limb for their country/military.

    Bottom line is that the military isn't often the conspiracy machine people think it is. This is clearly the result of some real human being working in the Pentagon (or somewhere) that think the right and humane thing to do is to try to improve the lives who have worked for the military, not some Dr. Evil scheme to take over the world.

  59. Wow! That's amazing! by NotmyNick · · Score: 1

    Not a single thing about the preview matches the article. Well, the prosthetic arm bit...but that's it. No rocket motor. No super-soldiers. It isn't even fully developed.

    --
    Notmysig
  60. Re:Wow! That's amazing! by NotmyNick · · Score: 1

    Summary, not preview. Preview is the button I should have used.

    --
    Notmysig
  61. Aside from the ludicrous title by JensenDied · · Score: 1
    From the second paragrah:

    The mechanical arm mechanical arm with a miniature rocket motor This is why I never bother to RTFA on here.
    --

    09:F9:11:02 - 9D:74:E3:5B - D8:41:56:C5 - 63:56:88:C0

  62. Site has been officially Slashdot'd by DrStoooopid · · Score: 1

    Site's down. ...so a rocket powered prosthetic arm eh?...

    I guess it'll make it easier to find a shoplifter equipped with one....just follow the vapor trail.

    --
    There are 2 groups of people you can make fun of on the Internet without fear of attack. The illiterate, and the Amish.
  63. Sir, Yessir! *Thud* by kabdib · · Score: 2, Funny

    "Figby, why aren't the troops saluting me?"

    "Sir, they don't want to wind up in the infirmary, like when General Havermeyer reviewed them."

    "What?"

    "Ah, but it was beautiful, Sir. The whole camp, passing in review, snapping their new powered arms up in perfect salutes . . . too much sun on the hardware . . . a firmware bug not caught in testing . . . ."

    "You mean?"

    "Fifteen hundred simultaneous concussions, Sir."

    "What?!"

    "They dropped in well-ordered lines, north-to-south, toes straight up. A credit to the training officers, if you ask me, Sir."

    --
    Any sufficiently advanced technology is insufficiently documented.
  64. Hydrogen peroxide? by nbucking · · Score: 1

    If this baby ever hits the market, it's time to by stock in Hydrogen peroxide producers.

  65. Shades of H. G. Wells... by Genda · · Score: 1

    This is so funny... I keep seeing a machined brass arm with whistles on the valves, so the thing plays like a calliope when ever it moves... Oh! Oh! Oh! and it has this little Babbage engine as it's controller!!!

  66. Rename the Army? by Brickwall · · Score: 1
    So now we'll have to call the Army "the Blue Meanies"?

    http://es.geocities.com/midithebeatles/video/yello w.htm

    --
    What was once true, is no longer so
  67. Supersoldier? I'm going to have to say her name by rpbird · · Score: 1

    Battle Angel Alita. There, I've said it.

  68. Cute gun by mattr · · Score: 1

    In the end of the video though the last object the robot picks up is a pistol. Anybody notice they don't make the robot pull the trigger?

  69. Re:Supersoldier? I'm going to have to say her name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought her name was Gally.

  70. Re:I was part of the beta testing group for this a by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for those of us with content filtering at work, could you define a 'dutch rudder'???

  71. Yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    After the Six Million Dollar Man, we had the Bionic Woman.

    Now that we have the Thirty Million Dollar Man, a new Bionic Woman to having the missile-launching bionic breasts would be a natural progression.

    1. Re:Yes by elrous0 · · Score: 1

      It's a natural progression of Dr. Franklin's work on the fembots. I still say that the OSI should never have kept those damn things in storage.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  72. Bionic monkey better be next by xednieht · · Score: 1

    Won't be spankin' the monkey until that gets an upgrade as well.

    --

    Hope is the currency of fools
  73. Atten-SHUN! by jandersen · · Score: 1

    Is this really a good idea? Can't you see the poor soldiers accidentally decapitating themselves when they salute?

  74. bionic arm by bronsinbound · · Score: 1

    Just think, the rocket power could rip off your body at practically hypersonic speeds! If it kills someone, you could be charged with murder because you should have known that a malfunction could reasonably have caused death! Alternatively, you can use it to fly to work and avoid the traffic. Due to the landing, however, you will be removed from the gene pool -- though that does help keep the population in check and maintain a sustainable population.

  75. Re:I was part of the beta testing group for this a by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    the urban dictionary has these definitions (which I got to by Googling "define dutch rudder"):
    1. Dutch Rudder. . . . . . . . . . . .[thumbs up] 362 up, 17 down [thumbs down]

      Having someone complete the act of masturbation by pulling up and down on the forearm, while the male holds his own penis.

      SnackCake gave Tonkin a Dutch Rudder, because they are two freaky people who like to try new things.

      tags masturbation sex acts kinky sex play tonkin snackcake
      by nfkiller Canada May 10, 2006 email it


    2. Dutch Rudder. . . . . . . . . . . .[thumbs up] 79 up, 35 down [thumbs down]

      When a man masturbates, and another person grabs his arm and makes him do the motion. It's sort of like a cross between masturbation and a handjob. He is still holding on, but the other person is still moving your arm.

      She gave him a dutch rudder last night.
      tags sex act masturbation group thing new handjob tonkin
      by Some Crate Denver May 10, 2006 email it
    3. dutch rudder. . . . . . . . . . . .[thumbs up] 51 up, 25 down [thumbs down]

      Noun - Halfway between masturbation and a handjob. i.e. when a man has his own hand on his penis but someone else is controlling the motion.

      SpinalTapp gave me the ole' dutch rudder one summer up on brokeback.

      tags hand job masturbation whacking off jerking off brokebackin' it

      by Josh Edwards denton texas May 11, 2006 email it
  76. Wow, I didn't realize inflation was that high... by chinton · · Score: 1

    In the 70s we could get an arm, two legs, and an eye for only $6 million.

  77. Found the reference... by Tmack · · Score: 1
    On armadillo's site: here. Watch the video. I assume cat is approximately equivalent to leather....

    Tm

    --
    Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
  78. OK, the ball's in your court... porn. by RexDevious · · Score: 1

    Up next: high-viscosity Teflon-based hand lotion.

    Seriously though, a bionic arm for soldiers? Couldn't those engineers have just invented robotic women? Plus, my understanding is that for every 72 of those we send, that's one less suicide bomber we have to deal with. And how tough could that even be? I mean, their virgins are covered head to foot in *burkas*. We could probably get away with throwing a few helium balloons under a burka-length black cloth. "Getcha 72 virgins, right here, right now. All ya gots ta do is leave us the !$@#$ alone."

    If one floats away, we just claim she's "floating up to heaven". Then they'll grab the remaining 71 real tight and, depending on how hefty those suicide bombers are, possible float away themselves. And if not, well, if you see a guy walking around holding 72 burka covered balloons, just wait until he's well away from crowds, and pop one. I'll bet those suicide bombers react badly sudden loud noises. Either way, problem solved.

  79. This is NOT about "super soldiers" by cortex · · Score: 1

    The article summary is completely wrong. I am a member of the Univ. of Utah team working on the neural control part of the DARPA revolutionizing prosthetics project. I can tell you definitively that this project is solely aimed at helping injured veterans. They have made a point of having the scientists and engineers working on this project meet people who have lost limbs while serving their country. It was very moving and motivational to meet these soldiers in person. I am pretty sure that the technology will also be made available to civilian amputees.

  80. be glad?! by namekuseijin · · Score: 1

    be very sad when it seems the only reason why emergency medicine evolves is to sustain the war-industry and its workers and victims... sounds like both cause and effect...

    --
    I don't feel like it...