Slashdot Mirror


Iranian Military Says It's Copying US Drone

New submitter skipkent writes "Iran's military has started to build a copy of a U.S. surveillance drone captured last year after breaking the software encryption, Iranian media reported on Sunday. General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, head of the Revolutionary Guards aerospace division, said engineers were in the final stages of decoding data from the Sentinel aircraft, which came down in December near the Afghan border, Mehr news agency reported."

70 of 350 comments (clear)

  1. Send the MPAA by qbast · · Score: 5, Funny

    It's obviously a copyright infringement. If we are lucky, maybe Iranians will just shoot them.

    1. Re:Send the MPAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      You're thinking way too small. We can also get Patent attorneys into the fight. Then, if we can get the whole war moved to the Eastern district of Texas, we'll have the home turf advantage.

    2. Re:Send the MPAA by lennier1 · · Score: 2

      I wouldn't put any money on Iran, yet.
      Even the guys in the Iranian government aren't as fucking crazy as that bunch.

    3. Re:Send the MPAA by CanEHdian · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's obviously a copyright infringement. If we are lucky, maybe Iranians will just shoot them.

      You're almost right. Terrorists? Oh who cares! WMDs? Sooo 10 years ago. But.... this is copyright infringement! And it is also circumventing an effective protection device ("digital lock")!! That means war! Send in the troops!

      --
      When the copyright term is "forever minus a day", live every day like it's the last.
    4. Re:Send the MPAA by qbast · · Score: 4, Funny

      Who cares about the troops. Send in the lawyers!

    5. Re:Send the MPAA by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 2

      Is it? I realise there's probably a whole bunch of official secrets (or the US equivalent), but I was under the impression that US government work was in the public domain by default and can't be copyrighted/patented?

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    6. Re:Send the MPAA by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 2

      So the IP on US military equipment is held by corporations and not the military? Wow, sensible.

      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    7. Re:Send the MPAA by quenda · · Score: 4, Funny

      Who cares about the troops. Send in the lawyers!

      We need a surge. Nothing short of drafting every lawyer in the US and allied countries, and sending them to Iran will suffice.

  2. DMCA violation? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    If only it were the RIAA or MPAA instead of the CIA, then Iran would be in serious trouble.

  3. Release the drone.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    #1 I doubt it .....
    #2 who is running things over there, Dr. Evil ?
    #3 In the extremely unlikely event that they somehow figured it all out - why on earth would you tell everyone ?

    1. Re:Release the drone.... by houstonbofh · · Score: 4, Insightful

      #3 In the extremely unlikely event that they somehow figured it all out - why on earth would you tell everyone ?

      It increases status, and is a deterrent. Win on all sides.

    2. Re:Release the drone.... by theshibboleth · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Re: #3 They want leverage. They may now have access to the software, but based on the condition of their air force they are using ~30 year old aviation technology and most of that is probably bought from China, Russia, etc. as opposed to being manufactured at home. Since they can't manufacture their own drones anytime soon they can at least potentially trade not using the information for anything else--or more likely not giving it to China or Russia--to advance their nuclear program. (And actually they might very well give the information to China or Russia if they then can get more support for their nuclear research.)

    3. Re:Release the drone.... by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

      With any luck they'll copy it too closely and we can fly it out of their on its maiden voyage.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    4. Re:Release the drone.... by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 4, Informative

      Iran not only constructs its own drones, it manufactures its own jet fighters.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghods_Ababil

    5. Re:Release the drone.... by arisvega · · Score: 2

      Remember Saddam Hussain saying that he had hundreds of WMDs when when he didn't and was being invaded because of this claim?

      Did he really say that? The claim was there, but as far as I recall it was George, Tony and co. that placed it.

      --
      The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
  4. Open Source by EmperorOfCanada · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It would be funny if they Open Sourced it.

    1. Re:Open Source by WindBourne · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In a way, they will. China will no doubt show up with this first.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:Open Source by Zackbass · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That strikes more at the heart of the issue here than you may realize. The actual aircraft sitting in their hands is much closer to a compiled binary than source.
      You can poke at it, run it, look inside and try to reverse engineer it, but the real secret sauce that goes into making drones like this is the design/manufacturing techniques and massive high tech industrial base that are necessary to produce the components. The aircraft's engine isn't likely going to give up the secrets of directional crystal growth that go into manufacturing the turbine blades, and the camera's CCD isn't likely to yield the secrets of semiconductor fabrication necessary to produce another one.

      --
      You gotta find first gear in your giant robot car
    3. Re:Open Source by mspohr · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They can probably buy most of the components off the shelf. I doubt they would have to build a semiconductor fab or turbine "directional crystal growth" thingies.
      Small jet engines are readily available (every airliner has one as an auxiliary power generator unit)... same for CCD cameras and lenses. GPS, CPUs and memory are commodity parts. The airframe can be easily reproduced since they have a real model to work from.
      The hard part will be the software that ties it all together and they seem to have made some progress on that front. This could be interesting. I do hope they open source whatever they decompile / reverse engineer / create. I'm sure the open source community would love to have a "drone stack" to work on.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    4. Re:Open Source by Nerdfest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm fairly sure China already has it. These days they most likely had a copy of the plans and the software before the first one was even flown.

    5. Re:Open Source by girlintraining · · Score: 4, Insightful

      isn't likely to yield the secrets of semiconductor fabrication necessary to produce another one.

      No, but it provides a blue print for what the finished product should look like, which can accelerate parallel development; If I asked you to design a replica of a Lamborghini, I'm sure your efforts would be a lot more successful if I gave you an actual car as opposed to just pictures of it.

      --
      #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
    6. Re:Open Source by Dodgy+G33za · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not to mention Israel

    7. Re:Open Source by arth1 · · Score: 2

      It's not unthinkable that they wrote it in the first place. Either on contract, or the US stole it.
      (Espionage goes both ways - it's not only the other side that participates in it.)

      Anyhow, it's not a copyright violation unless the code is copied. If it's just studied and you write your own software, they should be in the clear.
      And the Iranians are certainly not bound by any EULA preventing disassembly - it's not like they bought the plane.

    8. Re:Open Source by colinrichardday · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, if you give someone a Lamborghini, he/she would spend all of his/her time driving it.

    9. Re:Open Source by jeffmeden · · Score: 2

      That strikes more at the heart of the issue here than you may realize. The actual aircraft sitting in their hands is much closer to a compiled binary than source.

      You would think, but it turns out the drone was run on very well documented Ruby. Lucky for us, at the time the drone was built the government was using Rails 1.2 and after trying to upgrade the environment to Rails 3 the Iranians broke every single unit test. What good is a drone with Rails 1.2 these days??? Anyhow, that thing won't be flying again for a long time.

    10. Re:Open Source by gtall · · Score: 2

      And you know this how? References or you are wrong.

    11. Re:Open Source by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The Iranians should be able to do 95% of a drone off the shelf.

      However, their ability to add $5 Million in cost overruns for each drone might be hampered by an underdeveloped Corporate/Military Industrial Complex.

      --
      >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
    12. Re:Open Source by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 2

      " If I asked you to design a replica of a Lamborghini, I'm sure your efforts would be a lot more successful if I gave you an actual car as opposed to just pictures of it."

      Nope. In either case I am completely incompetent with regard to car design, so my design would suck and fail just as miserably as anything the Iranians are likely to come up with.

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    13. Re:Open Source by DerekLyons · · Score: 2

      Small jet engines are readily available (every airliner has one as an auxiliary power generator unit)

      While it's true that every airliner has a small turbine powered auxiliary generator, they're no more a small jet engine than my lawn mower's IC engine is a small F1 racing IC engine. Surface similarities in operation emphatically do not imply equalities in capability and performance. (No matter how many times Hollywood tells you that it does.)
       

      same for CCD cameras and lenses. GPS, CPUs and memory are commodity parts.

      Indeed, commercial grade equipment is available off the shelf. But do I really need to point out how unlikely it is that the drone is built of commercial grade parts?
       
      No, the OP has it right - to build a military grade unit, there's a lot of secret sauce. Between design, integration, and manufacture there's a lot of 'know how' embedded in the physical vehicle that's not visible to the naked eye and that to replicate takes considerable analysis and follow on development work. As another poster says, using the automobile analogy, it's easier to copy a Lamborghini when you have a real one for reference rather than just a picture - but "easier" is not the same as "easy". It's not just a matter of slapping together parts that look more-or-less the same, because you have to answer "why?" as well as "how?" and "what?".

    14. Re:Open Source by khallow · · Score: 2

      Throw in a bunch of different components with different dimensions, masses and performance characteristics, and you have what we like to call "a shitty knock-off."

      We can also call it a "prototype" and like it too. Once you have a working drone, even of the shitty knock-off variety, then you can improve it.

  5. Remember the scene in Iron Man 2? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Where Tony Stark pulls up the footage of other countries trying to duplicate his armor? Why do I have a feeling this is going to go something like that.

  6. The bastards! by golodh · · Score: 3, Funny
    They're infringing our copyrights!

    Now I suddenly understand the strategic importance of ACTA. If they'd signed ACTA, we'd nail 'em when they tried to sell their cheap knockoffs to the Chinese, the Russians, the North-Koreans, the Pakistani, the Venezuelans, the Cubans, the Jemenites, the Hamaz guerilla's, and ... .

  7. Re:goodluckwiththat by skipkent · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But not beyond China's. Iran and China are best buds, I'd imagine China is behind this, letting Iran wave their dick around since we've been harassing them endlessly for a while. This story http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/checkpoint-washington/post/probe-traces-bogus-military-parts-to-china/2011/11/07/gIQAmxglvM_blog.html, talks about counterfeit Chinese parts making their way into the weapons supply chain, with all the outsourcing we do to China, I'm sure their taking our tech and applying it elsewhere.

  8. Re:goodluckwiththat by houstonbofh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why? Not all of them live in mud huts... Underestimating the enemy is dangerous.

  9. Re:goodluckwiththat by sandytaru · · Score: 4, Funny

    They'll be thwarted once they discover all the measurements are in Imperial and not metric.

    --
    Occasionally living proof of the Ballmer peak.
  10. Re:goodluckwiththat by JosephTX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why, because only Americans are ingenious enough to be engineers? Just because it's beyond your understanding doesn't mean it's beyond someone else's even if they are from a country you seem to judgmentally believe can't have smart people.

    And good for them. What were we even doing sending drones into that country in the first place? Because "they're making nukes"? Even if Iran made a nuclear bomb, that would do nothing more than.. put them on equal footing with every country surrounding them who also has a nuclear bomb (most of which got theirs directly or indirectly from us). Frankly, any country spending $600 billion/year on the military doesn't get to cry when other people reverse-engineer the technology we're using to push them around.

  11. Is it just me? by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is it just me, or does copying a $100m spy drone that you easily captured seem like a bad direction to go?

    --

    "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
  12. Re:First! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    The Iranian Military just announced they are copying this comment.

  13. This Conflict could have been prevented... by dryriver · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While Dubya was in office in the U.S., Iran had a President named Mohammed Khatami. Unlike Ahmedinejad, Khatami was a moderate cleric in favor of womens' rights, political reforms, greater freedoms for Iranians, and other moderate ideals. Khatami also was no opposed to political cooperation with the United States, or at least the restoration of diplomatic relations. Bush could easily have reached out a (limited) hand of friendship, and Khatami might very well have shaken it. Relations between Iran and the U.S. could have improved markedly. What happened instead? Bush's Neocon advisers wanted no cooperation/relationship whatosever to develop with Iran. They wanted to maintain Iran's status as an "Enemy of the United States" (perhaps because Israel was also adamant that things be so, and Iran stay politically isolated). So Dubya never reached out to Khatami politically, and actually did the diametric opposite: Iran was included in post 9/11 America's new, and somewhat stupid concept of a "Axis of Evil" that's messing up everything for everyone. No relationship between the U.S. and Iran whatsoever flourished as a result. Not even a limited one. And what happened to Khatami? The moderate Iran President was eventually overruled by Iran's religious hardliners for being too "moderate" or "modern", and his post went to Mahmoud Ahmedinejad. The window of opportunity for improving relations between Iran and the U.S./West to some degree was there. But the Neocons wanted Iran to stay on the "Enemies of the U.S." list, and did their best to ensure that no rapprochement with Iran would take place. -------- That brings us to today. Iran and the U.S. are currently enemies. Neither side sees any value in engaging in serious talks or toning down the jingoistic rhetoric. The Iran situation could, at any point, turn into another "Hot War" (Israel in particular seems to like that idea a lot). And all this because Dubya's advisers told him not to shake Khatami's hand. The situation could have been very, very different if the West had engaged in even "limited relations" with Khatami's vision of a more moderate Iran.

    --
    Why did the chicken cross the road? Because Elon Musk put an AI chip in its head.
    1. Re:This Conflict could have been prevented... by tomhath · · Score: 3, Informative

      And what happened to Khatami? The moderate Iran President was eventually overruled by Iran's religious hardliners for being too "moderate" or "modern",

      You shot down your own attempt at revisionist history there. Ahmedinejad isn't really all that radical and would probably go along with some kind of improved relations if he could get away with it, but that's no more an option for him now than it was for Khatami ten years ago.

    2. Re:This Conflict could have been prevented... by PPH · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Not inconsistent, actually. The theocrats put Khatami into power to test the waters, so to speak. Would the US (and the rest of the world) approach a pragmatist? The answer which Bush the Lesser provided was, "No". So they tossed Khatami out and put Ahmedinejad in.

      Now, it really doesn't matter whether Ahmedinejad is capable of moderation or not. He is capable of playing (or actually is) a fanatic. And that's all that matters. The clerics gave moderation a chance and it failed. So they went with the hard line stance. Their position looks entirely logical. From their point of view, the USA has no consistent policy towards Iran, the Middle East, or the world, for that matter. It all depends on who we put into office every four years. And more often than not, that person is selected by the nuttiest of either of our political extremes. If I were Iran, I'd be building nukes, drones and anything else I could use to defend myself against such a manic-depressive political regime.

      Dealing with the USA is akin to living with a woman who suffers from severe PMS.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    3. Re:This Conflict could have been prevented... by Dodgy+G33za · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Is this REALLY what you think? Because outside in the real world all we really see is same old same old...

      Still killing Afghans and using more drones than ever to execute people who may or may not be involved in terrorism, and their families, and any pets, livestock and passers by that happen to be in the area.

      Oh, and adding Australia to the very long list of countries that you have bases in. Does anyone have a military base in the US? No, well why the fuck do you have to have one in my bloody country?

    4. Re:This Conflict could have been prevented... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would bet it is because your government and ours decided it would be a good idea. I am pretty sure we haven't invaded Australia ....yet.

    5. Re:This Conflict could have been prevented... by jklovanc · · Score: 2

      The moderate Iran President was eventually overruled by Iran's religious hardliners for being too "moderate" or "modern", and his post went to Mahmoud Ahmedinejad.

      Actually Mohammed Khatami served his maximum two terms as president; much like the US. Iran's religious hardliners didn't kick him out he just could not run again by law.

      The Iran situation could, at any point, turn into another "Hot War" (Israel in particular seems to like that idea a lot).

      Yeah, Israel really wants a Hot War where thousand of their people may die and possibly millions if they get nuked. I don't think they are that stupid. Israel wants security and that is very difficult with a nuclear Iran considering some of their statements such as proposing moving the Jewish state to Europe (which ignores the fact that most Jewish holy places are in Israel)..

      Here is some interesting evidence that the Iranian ruling elite didn't want better relations with the US;

      An opinion poll in 2003 asking Iranians if they supported resuming government dialogue with the United States found 75% in favor. The pollsters were jailed and at least one spent several years in prison.

      Why jail pollsters if one is not trying to suppress the information.

      Here is an interesting quote from wikipedia;

      n 2003, Jahangir Amuzegar, Finance Minister and Economic Ambassador in Iran's pre-1979 government, identified several obstacles to "resumption of relations" between the two countries from the American perspective:[69]
      Iranian state sponsorship of international terrorism[70]
      Pursuit of weapons of mass destruction
      Threats to neighbors in the Persian Gulf
      Repeated statements by the Iran's highest government officials that they wish "Death to America" and for Israel to "Vanish from the pages of time"
      Opposition to the Arab-Israeli peace process
      Violations of human rights

      Notice the date as being near the end of Khatami's first term and one year before the US presidential election. Even at that point there were many huge obstacles to diplomacy. Do you really think that Bush Junior would have been re-elected had he opened relations with Iran at that time with all those issues? It is likely he would have been seen as soft and unelectable.

      Where you seem to think that it was solely an issue on the US side that relations were and still are poor it appears that both sides have their hardliners that make diplomacy impossible.

  14. Want some help with that? by l0ungeb0y · · Score: 4, Funny

    Hi Iran, we here at the US DoD notice you're trying to build a Predator UAV. Of course Predators are pretty toothless without Hellfire missiles. So to show there's no hard feelings, we decided to send you some. An entire shipment of Hellfire Missiles should be arriving at your reverse engineering facility in just about ... now.

  15. OK This Pisses Me Off by tlambert · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have worked for a number of companies that thought their employees were so much smarter than everyone else that no one could possibly understand their code by disassembling it. That's wrong.

    In this particular game, yeah, they'd be right if they were talking U.S. programmers whose experience was Java, but people who had to deal with old hardware where memory locations mattered, no. I sometimes wonder at Apple folks who believe no one but them understands ARM assembly. I know at least three Russian programmers personally who can quote hex codes for ARM instructions for pretty much everything you'd want to do. I am guessing I am not connected enough to know them all.

    People in the third world are at a significant advantage. They deal with the hardware and know what the hell they are doing. I personally blame the change in accreditation standards that caused U.S. people to concentrate on being rather than doing. Theory is great until you have to engage in total war.

    I personally expect a wave of smart people to wash over the U.S. any time soon. The only question is whether they will have U.S. visas or if they will be employed by a foreign power.

    -- Terry

    -- Terry

    1. Re:OK This Pisses Me Off by JosephTX · · Score: 2

      I expect the opposite. With salaries stagnating, health care still employer-based, and politics that are increasingly moving toward "xenophobia and batshit insane theocracy", who's going to choose the US over the EU or Japan or China 20--hell, even 10--years from now? There's only so much that a slightly higher salary and slightly lower income tax can do to attract smart people when those countries offer better hospital access, public transportation, and education for their kids: All things that sound pretty appealing to people who grow up in countries offering none of that.

  16. For what purpose? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Drones over Israel? Over the US?

    I'd love to see either of those things happen, just to watch the reaction. The US seems to think it is fine to send spy drones over Iran, so presumably it's just fair game to send them over the mainland US too.

    The US has spy satellites watching every corner of the earth, presumably the collective EU and China do too, Japan has some... Naturally Iran will be putting its own up at some point, and North Korea will too eventually. Fair's fair, right?

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  17. Copy a copy? by BenJeremy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They didn't capture a drone intact, they displayed a mockup, and a bad one at that.

    All this talk about creating their own drone is more propaganda to prop up the Iranian government's "rep" in the middle east among Islamic countries, who pretty much buy everything Iran's news agencies pump out, clonebrush photoshops, crappy models and all.

  18. Doubtful they have "reverse-engineered" anything by daveschroeder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The most I can see them doing is build a mockup that looks like it, showing it flying, and then the entire world concluding, "OMG, they copied the US drone!!!111" — except that it won't contain any of the systems and technology aboard the RQ-170.

    Would be a great propaganda victory for Iran, though. Which is exactly the sort of thing they're looking for. Iran's playing up the drone story again, this week saying that Russia and China are aggressively seeking information about it, and then two days later making this "announcement"? With Iran claiming it used a force field and "advanced space technology" to down the drone (and no, this isn't simply a failure of the translation), nothing is too surprising.

    Of course, US drones have been flying over Iran for years, and drones are still flying over Iran after the RQ-170 incident.

    Interestingly, as the Western press and pundits hyperventilated over the loss of the drone, Iran's state-controlled media and spokesmen repeatedly changed and finessed their story to fit with the most panicked narratives of "what might have happened".

    Logic would dictate that the drone simply malfunctioned and crashed, or at absolute MOST had its control link jammed — a known vulnerability of UAS — and was not brought down in a controlled fashion, nor has been "reverse-engineered".

  19. Why? by 91degrees · · Score: 2

    Iran isn't a backwater. They have a robotics industry and a space program. Maybe not as sophisticated as Japan, and the US, but pilotless drones aren't designed with cutting edge technology. I don't see why this would be outside Iran's current capabilities.

  20. Re:Doubtful they have "reverse-engineered" anythin by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They claim they jammed the control signal and spoofed the GPS (jammed the encrypted signal and spoofed the unencrypted signal which the drone fell back on). The drone then circled (possibly) and eventually decided to return to base and land, which happened at the spoofed location inside Iran. Do you really find that so extremely difficult to believe? Why do you think "logic dictates" that this is a lie? Alternatively, why do you think this doesn't qualify as bringing the drone down in a controlled fashion?

  21. Re:goodluckwiththat by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why, because only Americans are ingenious enough to be engineers?

    I've met some very smart and capable "Persian" engineers. They don't live in Iran, though :)

    Seriously, a lot of the smartest and best-educated Iranians no longer live in the country, and probably won't unless the place changes politically.

    Think about it - if your home country had a regime like Iran's and you had the means to live just about anywhere else, would you stick around? And if you did, would you work for that regime? There are selfish smart people (duh), but a significant portion of smart people want nothing to do with such a regime.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  22. Persian Style by supaneko · · Score: 2

    They're just going to take the one they have and put gold curtain rods & blue carpet in it.

    (South Park)

  23. Re:Go ahead. by Dodgy+G33za · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Here in Australia I heard a story about being able to buy fake Catapillar mining gear off the Chinese. Apparently you can't even tell from the serial numbers of the parts.

    A couple of years back a mob got in the way of a shipment of chip card bank teller equipment from China to the UK, and inserted a few extra electronics, including WIFI. Then re-shrunk wrapped them and sent them on their way.

    There is nothing that can't be reverse engineered/hijacked if it is important enough. And on the importance scale this would be right up there for both China and Iran.

  24. Re:goodluckwiththat by JosephTX · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Brain drains don't include everyone in a country. In fact, particularly in Iran's case, I suspect that many educated people REFUSE to come to the west because of how they've been treated their whole lives by us. And what about Iran's "regime" is any worse than recent American regimes? (I don't think I need to point to our last president, who's responsible for 100x more deaths than 9/11, while simultaneously using 9/11 as an excuse).

    You're also assuming that being smart automatically gives someone the means to leave the country. They need money for that first, and that means even those prospective emigrants need to work in their own country before they can do that. And those who DO emigrate are more likely to go to China than the US, because of China's good relations, treatment, and trade with Iran relative to the west's.

    And "Selfish?" If we're getting into broad generalizations, then I'd bet that those STAYING in Iran are likely to do so for less selfish reasons than those leaving it. Those leaving it are just trying to make better lives for themselves (which is understandable); those staying--with the freedom to go to richer, less barren countries--are doing so to make better lives for their neighbors, co-workers, friends, and complete strangers. But that's only assuming that someone from their perspective would have the CRAZY opinion that the giant rich country bombing them, spying on them, threatening them with trade embargoes, and actively supporting their regional rivals doesn't have their family's (or 80 million fellow Iranians') best interests at heart.

  25. Re:Doubtful they have "reverse-engineered" anythin by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Interesting

    'Undamaged' is relative. Remember they didn't show the undercarriage in their pictures, it was all gussied up with banners. Either the Iranians have decided that the drone is female and has to be modestly dressed, or the thing crash landed / wheels up landed and has a fair bit of damage.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
  26. Re:goodluckwiththat by JosephTX · · Score: 2

    Funny how "un-innovative" Japan manages to have 10x our internet speeds for the same costs, or how they're largely responsible for video games (one of the most innovative ideas ever made) even existing today. For such an innovative country, America is strangely behind Japan and China in terms of public transportation and high-speed rail.

    Sony isn't very innovative today, but really, do you think Microsoft or Google or (oh god) Dell or HP are any better? All the new tech you're hearing about in the news is made by STARTUPS, which are just bought out by big tech companies. One of the only big American companies that still "innovates" (how I hate that word now) is IBM. Meanwhile just look at the Japanese auto industry compared to the American auto industry.

    But since we're talking about software innovation, I guess we should just forget about a little thing called Linux that was written by a college kid in Finland. You don't hear about software innovation outside the US because most of it isn't big enough to be news all around the world. Do you think Instagram receives much media attention in Europe?

  27. Re:goodluckwiththat by interval1066 · · Score: 2

    http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-57414373-64/sonys-fall-and-japans-hang-ups/?tag=mncol;editorPicks http://www.firstpost.com/business/sony-gets-beaten-by-apple-samsung-innovation-sees-2-9-bn-loss-201493.html I was there, I know how business is done in Japan, its not efficient. The Chinese simply lack the know-how, I'm sure they'll catch up though.

    --
    Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
  28. Re:Doubtful they have "reverse-engineered" anythin by daveschroeder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So why aren't they bringing down every UAS that continues to fly surveillance missions over Iran?

    Common sense doesn't have a bias.

    Believing a drone whose undercarriage is completely obscured, probably due to significant damage, is "undamaged" is what's biased. The US asking for the drone back doesn't verify it didn't crash. It verifies they have our drone — which they do.

  29. Re:goodluckwiththat by Black+Parrot · · Score: 2

    Why? Not all of them live in mud huts... Underestimating the enemy is dangerous.

    But popular. Especially when you're trying to convince yourself that invading them would be easy.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  30. Re:goodluckwiththat by qbast · · Score: 2

    Invading would be easy, sure. I have no doubts that regular Iranian army would get steamrolled within a week. Unfortunately only after this "victory" real war would begin.

  31. Re:First! by cold+fjord · · Score: 4, Funny

    It must. I see many highly rated comments that are farcical if you know much of anything about the topic under discussion.

    --
    much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
  32. Iran by barv · · Score: 2

    Iran is a different strategic problem to Iraq or Afghanistan.

    1. It is four times bigger (80 million people.)
    2. It is an old culture, like Egypt, China, India.
    3. There are not any "friendly" adjacent states (like Turkey, Pakistan).

    After assessing these factors, I suspect US military planners advise against overt action.

  33. Re:goodluckwiththat by Vitriol+Angst · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That makes a lot of sense. For the Same reason, during WW II, the US got great minds like Einstein.

    However, due the incessant prattle of race baiting fascists on Fox News, and they Xenophobia promoted by Dominionist religions, we are probably LOSING a lot of great minds to countries that aren't becoming a bunch of fascist pricks.

    I was ready to bail on this country if McCain/Palin were chosen as our leaders -- and I might be ready to bail if the re-elected Obama is still a Republican door mat. By any measure, this country has been SECURED up the wazoo. We have a 40 year low in crime but the police forces around the country are still gathering up drones, body armor, and pepper spray as if they had to deal with some sort of siege war.

    Before November of 2008 -- a lot of laws and banks seemed to be VERY READY for the problems ahead -- and it strikes me that things like the Patriot Act and NDAA bills are all about preparing for an expected problem that someone worked really hard to create. You know, like Scott Walker needing to fire teachers because he had an economic shortfall in his state, that was about a million dollars less than the money he gave away to corporations to reward them for being in the state.

    Disaster capitalists are creating the justification for their austerity measures, and anyone who is truly insightful, is already aware of where this country is headed. Perhaps I'm not that smart -- because I'm still an American. How fucking sad is that?

    --
    >>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
  34. Re:First! by hlavac · · Score: 2

    Now Iran will be invaded on the pretense of copyright infringement, the worst of the atrocities known to man!

  35. Re:goodluckwiththat by expatriot · · Score: 2

    If you are BaHai, things are much worse for you in Iran than anywhere else in the world. Many of the Persians in the west are Baha'i.

  36. Re:Doubtful they have "reverse-engineered" anythin by daveschroeder · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well, let's see — not only is Iran Times is not state-owned, it is published in the US. It is also just repeating a Washington Post story. Further, the fact that the US is continuing to fly drone missions over Iran unabated runs counter to the Iranian government's narrative that they have the capability to "take down" a US drone in the first place.

    Is FOX News a better source?

    How about:

    Stars and Stripes
    Business Insider

  37. Re:Bad example by Dolphinzilla · · Score: 2

    although if you are going to drive a car that gets such dismal gas mileage as a Lambo then living in an oil rich country is probably a good move - come to think of it when I was going to college the first Lamborghini Countach I ever saw was being driven by some rich kid from Saudi Arabia

  38. Re:Doubtful they have "reverse-engineered" anythin by daveschroeder · · Score: 2

    Oh man, this is great.

    UAS have some known, long term vulnerabilities that are intrinsic to UAS and cannot be "patched". There are ways some of them can be mitigated or minimized, but we're not talking about "patching a vulnerability" on a Linux host, here. I'm also not sure you're aware how long it takes to get ANY changes into operational ISR systems.

    ...and then to throw in the claim that the primary reason we'd want to continue to fly UAS missions over Iran would be to make their drone story seem "less credible", when that ridiculously and utterly pales in comparison to our actual reason for even doing this, which is Iran's nuclear program, instead of simply accepting that the drone crashed?