It's a performance gain because it's extremely rare that all your cores are maxed out at once, if you can distribute the computing power more evenly it's a performance gain in most circumstances even if the net computing power required increases.
While the weapons manufacturers are a strong lobby, I don't think they promote shooting civilians just to sell more ammo;)
You'd think they'd much rather lobby for live ammo exercises. If anything having their weapons involved with killing civilians is bad for the weapons manufacturers as they risk the politicians switching their budget to "less lethal" weaponry.
If you're going to go all conspiracy theory on us, you need to atleast think "What do they actually gain from this?", in this particular case noone gains anything from needlessly killing civilians and everyone hopefully considers it to be a mistake in retrospect.
My point is that the terrorists/insurgents/rebels recruit people by saying that the western powers are evil, by killing civilians we play into the stereotype and make it easier for them to recruit, to actually put an end to it we have to show them that we're the good guys.
If you had watched the video with functioning eyes you'd have noticed that cameras are infact not weapons, while there was one object that could have been confused with an RPG launcher it was pretty damn apparent that was not the case by the time they had circled around.
Not really, a city is per definition full of civilians, that's why we call it a city and not military base.
Since civilian causalities = enemy propaganda = more enemies, the safer thing to do is actually to double check that what you're shooting at is infact an enemy, otherwise your enemies will just multiply.
In this particular case the Apache would have easily noticed that they were all unarmed if it had waited another 5 seconds before shooting.
I suspect that is the policy for targets who are not confirmed threats, the problem seemed to be that the gunner kept giving false intel, stating that various weapons were carried as fact rather then admit that it's hard to see and it should be confirmed.
Some civilian casualties are probably unavoidable yes, but the goal needs to be zero, the military needs to double check before it shoots at groups of people otherwise it'll just dig itself into a longer war.
Oh yes, that's not a jacket, I said that everyone else was carrying jackets, there's no "5-6 AK-47's". There's one large dark object which might be mistaken for an RPG, two dark objects with shoulder straps (The cameras?) and a number of jackets.
Even if the long dark object was an RPG, that doesn't seem like a reason to gun down the 8 other people that were obviously unarmed.
I think that the millitary like all groups of people have good people and bad people, in this case it would appear that the Apache gunner was one of the less good ones.
Obviously the way to end terrorism is killing civilians, that'll surely not create any pissed off relatives willing to strap bombs to their chests, not at all.
Slashdot Mirror
3D movies are projected at 120 FPS, 60fps per eye.
The problem is that script development is one of those things you can't get by throwing money at it.
Well, that's sorta what the army is designed to do, kill people. They're a piss poor at peacekeeping.
They also had a horrifyingly bad angle, usually the third person camera is much further up then that.
Only that the hole in the roof is a requested feature, without which they wouldn't be able to sell their operating system (backwards compatibility).
It's a performance gain because it's extremely rare that all your cores are maxed out at once, if you can distribute the computing power more evenly it's a performance gain in most circumstances even if the net computing power required increases.
While the weapons manufacturers are a strong lobby, I don't think they promote shooting civilians just to sell more ammo ;)
You'd think they'd much rather lobby for live ammo exercises. If anything having their weapons involved with killing civilians is bad for the weapons manufacturers as they risk the politicians switching their budget to "less lethal" weaponry.
If you're going to go all conspiracy theory on us, you need to atleast think "What do they actually gain from this?", in this particular case noone gains anything from needlessly killing civilians and everyone hopefully considers it to be a mistake in retrospect.
That's not really what I was trying to say.
My point is that the terrorists/insurgents/rebels recruit people by saying that the western powers are evil, by killing civilians we play into the stereotype and make it easier for them to recruit, to actually put an end to it we have to show them that we're the good guys.
If you had watched the video with functioning eyes you'd have noticed that cameras are infact not weapons, while there was one object that could have been confused with an RPG launcher it was pretty damn apparent that was not the case by the time they had circled around.
Not really, a city is per definition full of civilians, that's why we call it a city and not military base.
Since civilian causalities = enemy propaganda = more enemies, the safer thing to do is actually to double check that what you're shooting at is infact an enemy, otherwise your enemies will just multiply.
In this particular case the Apache would have easily noticed that they were all unarmed if it had waited another 5 seconds before shooting.
It scares me how many comments there supports the shooting.
Not expensive enough apparently as they completely failed at target identification.
Obviously the Apache pilots need to be better trained in target identification if we're expected to allow them to deal with insurgencies.
On a battlefield it's ok to shoot anything that looks like it has a gun that moves, in a city it's not.
Get an eye-exam, kkthx
I suspect that is the policy for targets who are not confirmed threats, the problem seemed to be that the gunner kept giving false intel, stating that various weapons were carried as fact rather then admit that it's hard to see and it should be confirmed.
Some civilian casualties are probably unavoidable yes, but the goal needs to be zero, the military needs to double check before it shoots at groups of people otherwise it'll just dig itself into a longer war.
Oh yes, that's not a jacket, I said that everyone else was carrying jackets, there's no "5-6 AK-47's". There's one large dark object which might be mistaken for an RPG, two dark objects with shoulder straps (The cameras?) and a number of jackets.
Even if the long dark object was an RPG, that doesn't seem like a reason to gun down the 8 other people that were obviously unarmed.
I think that the millitary like all groups of people have good people and bad people, in this case it would appear that the Apache gunner was one of the less good ones.
Obviously the way to end terrorism is killing civilians, that'll surely not create any pissed off relatives willing to strap bombs to their chests, not at all.
In what sick mind would that be a valid excuse to kill them?
Because all long dark objects are RPG's!!!!
Or not.... Watch 3.10->3.15 on the long video, just before they open fire.
Watch 3.10->3.15 on the long video, just before he opened fire and you'll realize how wrong you are.
I'm not an expert at Iraqi fashion, but people do wear jackets in warm weather
http://images.google.se/images?q=summer%20jacket&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&hl=en&tab=wi
Your "RPG" has three leg and your AK-47's are jackets, I hope you never get near a weapon.
I see one person carrying a camera, I see one person carrying a camera stand and a number of people are holding their jackets in their right hand.
I see exactly 0 potential rifles.