Slashdot Mirror
James Bond Gadgets
whencanistop writes "Given that the new James Bond film is just about to be released, this is quite a nice summary of James Bond gadgets from past films. Tomorrow Never Dies was on telly last night and I was commenting on how the mobile phone that controlled the BMW was awesome, why they haven't done it in real life is beyond me (although there would probably be a few accidents if they ever did). Ridiculous to think that in 1963 the gadget of choice for Bond was a pager though." Of course, the best gadget in the Bond universe wasn't even 007's ... Jaws' teeth were the envy of every kid with braces.
are just car/gadget ads.
Back then a pager was a big thing. Consumer electronics of that type were still kind of new back then.
Honestly, some people seem to think the world began with episode 1 of star wars.
Honor Blackman was my least favorite of all the Bond girls. Now, her Flying Circus pilots were another story!
Why, without your clothes, you're naked, Miss Dudley!
Myth Busters build a remote controlled car every other episode (they always seem to build it from scratch... odd).
Here's something that's bugged me for years (morbid though alert). You can easily add a couple of servos to a car's control system and control it via remote (although long range trips would be tricky even with long-range communications and a camera).
Servos and remotes are cheaper than people. Why do we still have suicide bombers?
He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
Why do we still have suicide bombers?
For the glory of Islam? Anyway, why would they want to wait around here before collecting the virgins?
Here's something that's bugged me for years (morbid though alert). You can easily add a couple of servos to a car's control system and control it via remote (although long range trips would be tricky even with long-range communications and a camera).
Servos and remotes are cheaper than people. Why do we still have suicide bombers?
Because a driverless car downtown might draw some attention? No, seriously. Aside from the difficulty of a remote driver having good situational awareness in crappy Iraqi traffic, there's also the matter of camouflaging intent. Some suicide missions involve multiple people. Understandable if there's three separate bombers hitting one location but why have two people with one bomb? Why not have the second guy drive another bomb vehicle or hold back for another mission? Camouflage.
Two guys are driving a delivery truck. You wouldn't think suicide bomber, that's only a loner. Now you've got a delivery driver arguing with the compound guard. C'mon, I got a delivery, I need inside. The guard would already be shooting at a driverless truck coming at him but this delivery looks like every other delivery coming through the gate.
Right before we went into Afghanistan, a popular leader of the Northern Alliance gave an interview to a foreign television crew. This was a multi-man crew, the journalist, cameraman, and soundman. The bomb was in the camera. Interview starts, the television crew, their target, and several bystanders are killed. No single person could have gotten that close but several people posing as a film crew? That seems reasonable.
I've also heard stories about kids included in suicide vehicles. They're probably not the driver's kids, who knows how they were abducted. But they're in the car making it look eminently civilian when the driver pulls up and hits the detonator.
This sort of thing has two benefits for the terrorist. One, he gets to destroy his target. Two, now the GI's are all jumpy and no longer willing to discount kids as a sign the car is safe, they'll end up shooting up more innocent civilians, raising the terror level, and making the people more enraged with America.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
Some of us can enjoy fiction without buying into it.
I pity your inability to use your brain.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on