Slashdot Mirror
Grenade-Style Wireless Camera For Combat
nk497 writes "A new wireless camera called the I-Ball is being developed to be shot into locations using a grenade launcher so troops can see what lies ahead. The I-Ball sends real-time, 360-degree video back to soldiers while it's flying through the air and when it lands."
Why not just shoot the grenades in there. Then you'll know what lies ahead (bodies).
Yeah but it might be good to know if those bodies are enemies, civilians or friendlies before you frag them ;)
My million dollar question: What's to stop your opponent from figuring out which frequencies this device transmits on and jamming it and/or targeting it with anti-radiation weapons?
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Make it so that the explosives can be blown after you check the video. If there are a bunch of men with rifles, blow the grenade. If there are women and children, retrieve it.
I sure hope these things are less than $100... hell, less than $10 for that matter. I sure as hell don't think we need to waste that kind of money on stuff the enemy might take home as a souvenir.
"Why can't we all just get along?!" I'd rather see research and development dollars spent making war and conflict obsolete.
At the moment, most of the conflict where it is "the world" vs. the U.S.A., seems to be stemming from ridiculous policies that no one can fully explain. Why do we care about the "spread of communism"? Why do we care about "defending Israel"? There are a lot of humanitarian causes far more dire and we leave those tragedies alone with a clear conscience. Can someone tell me why we spend SO much money and so many human lives on "expanding democracy" and "defending Israel"?
What if it is women and or children with rifles?
one-eyed san francisco artist looking for the tech that will allow her to put a webcam in her eye socket:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2008/11/15/2008-11-15_san_francisco_artist_looks_to_replace_lo.html
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I was assuming that infantry soldiers would use it after they shot up a building. It would be nice to see what damage you inflicted before going in. By that time the folks inside probably have a good idea that they have visitors. The article itself seemed jsut as focused on armor which you generally do not use to sneak up on anybody.
Why sit here and worry about terminology?
I'm alarmed by the trend of childish terms being used to discuss grave and complicated situations.
This really is not a bad idea.
The US Military used a similar strategy in Afghanistan where they would radio the enemy and offer them money to surrender!
Apparently it was very successful. Hard cash, even if it's in US dollars, can be very persuasive.
It was actually cheaper for them to pay off the enemy than use their expensive munitions!
:) You're wrong.
In Iraq, every time we kill innocents, we are fueling anti-American sentiments, effectively perpetuating a cycle of violence by tipping popular and individual sentiments in favor of insurgent groups. Petraeus himself is trying to minimize incidental casualties, and part of this effort is putting more decision power in the hands of lower level soldiers in the field who have the power to recognize targets.
Differentiating between "bad guys" and "good guys" is not only important morally, it is a vital part of our current anti-insurgence strategy.
Please, leave your knee-jerk anti-intellectualism at the door. Petraeus received a Ph.D. studying this stuff, and while he isn't a foot soldier, this kind of intellectual work is vital.
So highlighting the killing of innocent civilians is propaganda. I guess that makes Amnesty International the modern day Goebbels.