Cute reply but ignorant of US military doctrinal and technological history. You are also confusing area denial with terror attacks. Doctrine always follows behind technological advances. Guided munitions weren't available then so rough saturation still needed to be used to take out targets.
You really don't know what you're talking about. Terror bombing isn't effective and hasn't been the U.S. strategy since WWII. Neutralizing enemy ability to wage war is the goal. Soldiers who are exposed to tear gas in training are being given experience so they can learn to handle exposure and degraded ability to function. They aren't allowed to use BC weapons but they have decontamination equipment and protective suits. They're not suicide zombies.
That's possible, too. If you were in the situation of being given valid orders to launch ICBMs, though, you were arguably already as good as dead. Common discussions were wether or not a dead body consumed more oxygen than a live one, if the chains that held the escape hatch doors were so long that the door would kill the person who tried to open it, where the escape tunnel ended (under the helicopter landing pad?), if the sand inside it had calcified or if there was enough room in the capsule to hold all the sand. There were food and water supplies but how long could that last and would you want to live? I don't remember anyone saying they would feel guilty, more wondering if it would be possible to survive.
Yup, just like the way U.S. infantry soldiers get to experience tear gas.
That guy's statement is so ridiculous, it's almost beyond belief. What possible legitimacy could exist for the idea that only a recipient of something is in a position to take a related action? Used as a principle, that idea means pure anarchy.
What has changed is the ability of an individual or small groups to have access to information and communication methods more so than in the past. That is true for EVERYONE. Additionally, "offensive" actions without responsibility to protect a geography are always and have always been far "easier" and far less expensive than defensive or state-protective actions. The premise of the article is nothing new. The same applied to the crossbow which the Pope declared would be so horrible a weapon that wars would cease, or metal projectiles or machine guns or trains or... you name it. The more technology is available, of any type, the more technology can be used for "warfare". You can make poison gas in large quantities from items bought at any grocery store. BFD. The only people who would be stunned by the "revelation" of this article are the people who still think human wave assaults are used or that drug-addicted illiterates are tricked into military service. In the 1960s there were lenty of methods for distributing information (mimeograph machines, etc.) and lots of improvised munitions used for terrorist activities. The same was true in... every war which proceeded all current wars... and various civil situations. WTF, don't schools even mention the haymarket riots or assassinations any more? This article is as precient as those warnings on citrus-based cleaners not to drink them.
Minuteman II had 6 thumbwheels on the enable panel. The most common setting during a demonstration for visitors to the trainer was ENABLE. That's with the unclassified launch instructions which were a PR thing. ICBMs had far more stringent controls than theater weapons, though. Some of the Army's unclassified field manuals for tactical nukes were a joke, as if it would be possible to retrieve all the "friendlies" from the target area and go through multiple layers of command. ICBMS were very interconnected and no pistol would stop anybody bad enough to get into the complex and past the blast door. Pistols were the greatest threat to bored Missileer toes...
-- second odd confirmation phrase I've had for this post: "deterred"
You've watched War Games too much. The pistols were not to shoot the other guy. They were for defense in case someone managed to get downstairs and the blast doors weren't open. Far more than 4 critical stopping points, too. L7L7L7 was a common test setting in the trainers.
The cover sheet of any classified document states the highest classification of any of the contents.
FOIA is not declassification.
Declassified documents are clearly marked on each page, typically with a stamp which identifies the date and frequently the declassifying authority. This is to avoid false reports of unauthorized disclosure.
After I posted those comments I remembered Zyklon-B was originally a rat poison. I've never worked as an exterminator but I guess anyone doing that would want some kind of isolation suit if at all possible and the detox showers and everything that goes with it. I don't think I've ever seen ANY report about that in the media. You'd think there would be storage areas, office buildings, etc. which were vacant for a while and rats and such moved in.
There's a short description I read as a Freshman in College about the Nacirema people. For some reason, that popped into my head when I was reading the the wikileaks page. That's what got me to thinking about benign uses of the equipment. If you've never read that thing, Google the phrase. It's really good.
I won't agree with your conclusion about futility. Part of that is my outlook (and hope) but part is also the time frame. It's too soon to make a final conclusion. Some people say the Vietnam War was a failure, some say the strategic goal of stopping Communist expansion in that part of the world was accomplished. We've still got lots of military in Germany, officially as part of the post-WWII actions. Either "view" of the current conflict can probably pull together enough "facts" to support it. We'll just have to agree to disagree about that aspect.
Maybe the biochem equipment hasn't been discussed openly because the press has blown a lot of things out of proportion or maybe it was released to the press but they didn't want to bring it into the open because then the detox aspects might come up which would de-boogieman the issue quite a bit, who knows? By the time "news" gets to Joe Blow consumer, it's been through all kinds of filtering and selection. I've often wondered why the U.S. Government doesn't have some kind of more prominent news agency of its own so their view would be more easily found. I'd rather get information from the source than rely only on somebody else's edited presentation, regardless of any editorial slant. Seems to me that would help keep the free press reporting fact and separating editorial views from it more just as a free press helps hold the U.S. Government accountable.
I've walked by the TV when the Military Channel has some of the Army news playing, the stuff they create for themselves. I guess that and the various Government web sites kind of fill the function I'm trying to describe.
Assuming the wikipedia excerpts aren't taken out of context, the prohibition is against military USE, not possession. I remember as a kid our neighborhood hired a pest control company to spray some kind of fog which was toxic to mosquitos but harmless to people. DDT was used to de-louse people freed from the Nazi prison camps, similar to the way chemical dunking pits are used with livestock in the U.S. A crop duster plane could be used for dusting crops or dispersing biochem agents. I'd guess a man-portable gas dispenser could have all kinds of uses that aren't military, especially in a warm climate. Gas dispersion might be the most effective, least costly and quickest way to do some forms of detox on buildings. As irrigation is spread to more areas, maybe these will be used to help control pests.
The splash page has a few mentions of domestic use of agents but doesn't define what that means. The coallition forces have been autorized on numerous occassions to act as the law enforcement heavies for the various regional and national authorities in Iraq. That would certainly fit the description of domestic use. Certainly, they'd need to be prepared if there are riots or something like that.
Don't misunderstand what I'm stating to be endorsement for prohibitted use. I'm not saying there is cavalier use of equipment, or that there should be. I'm separating the existance of equipment/material from the projected uses as implied by wikileaks and Wired.
The U.S. has a permanent seat on the UN Security Council with full veto ability. The U.S. is also the vast bulk of just about any U.N. military activity. Are you proposing the U.S. would use its military to attack itself? There isn't any proof of breach because breach would be by use, not possession. Actually, since the coallition forces are fullfilling the earlier mandates of the U.N. wrt Saddam Hussein's Iraq, the U.N. would have to attack itself with troops which it doesn't have.
wikileaks might be "useful idiots" in this case. The document is four years old so it is most likely heavily outdated.
Wired throws in a few leftists editorial comments and totally misses the importance. If you were a captured Arab terrorist, where would you rather be, at Guantanamo or in a Turkish/Egyptian/Saudi jail? "Hmmm...food, tropical weather and safety from other people or...a Middle Eastern prison...tough decision." Wired must not know the definition of repatriation.
It's also possible this was "leaked" for positive PR to conclusively demonstrate a lot of attention to caring for the physical and spiritual needs of the detained combatants, especially when compared to the terrorist manuals which are around.
Not really a correction, you're refining what I stated. Provocative dress is provocative because it...provokes. In some venues, that's what women want.
I don't know how anyone could draw your conclusion unless they're looking only at areas which have very heavy fundamentalist domination. There's certainly appreciable freedom in the north and urban areas. Iraq is about the same size as California. Socially acceptable dress for a woman in parts of San Francisco isn't accepted in small, rural towns. The same is and was true in Iraq.
btw, I really appreciate your conversive tone. Too often posts here are like the Monty Python skit ARgument Clinic.
Uh...the "bad guys" don't limit what "they" do based on what "we" do. They've been beheading and torturing far longer than "we've" been "there."
If you concept actually applied, wouldn't "they" be lining up to go to the tropical paradise at Guantanamo where they get clean clothes, good food, wonderful weather, new Korans, etc.?
What you propose is like "head they win, tails we lose."
Phosphorus and magnesium have some wonderful qualities for pyrotechnics. There's a huge difference between using it for that and using it in offensive weapons.
Likewise, I suppose tear gas could be compared to VX and mustard gas the same way a BB gun could be compared to an actual rifle. Tear gas has a very short term effect and doesn't main or kill. It's used for temporary non-lethal control and intimidation. If someone was shooting me with a BB gun, it would have the same effect of keeping me physically separate from them or otherwise change my actions. Hmmm...that's not a perfect analogy. A Red Rider BB gun could shoot your eye out, kid.
I see quite a few "convenient allusions" on the wikileaks splash page. As an example, they show the presentation slide of truck-mounted biological agent factories and say the U.S. "conveniently" has portable labs like that in Iraq now. There is no mention, whatsoever, that manufacturing antidotes for biochem agents can only be done with the same type of equipment and those anti-agents have a relatively short lifespan. The contents of a hospital or dentist's office could be reported in such a way to make it appear as a torture chamber. Many biological agents are slight variations on relatively benign entities. They work by tricking the human body's immune system. It's not unreasonable to have these types of facilities available locally to quickly evaluate any discovered substances and create antidotes or to neutralize them by processing them into something benign. It would be highly irresponsible NOT to have the facilities available.
wikileaks' "analysis" isn't divided into factual statements and editorial interpretation, it's all intermixed. That's unfortunate.
Well, come on, that's not the whole story. Rape as a means to control and punish citizens (subjects? What's the proper word for the people who live in a dictatorship? That's a serious question. "Citizens" seems more appropriate to republics and democracies. "Subjects" are under royal rule...) The "average" or "common" woman in Saddam's Iraq probably wasn't dressing in a highly provocative manner because that would draw attention.
We will have to agree to disagree about what are acceptable societal losses due to crime, warfare and terrorism. Apparently, we will also have to agree to disagree on the definition of terrorism. Is extortion terrorism? Is providing material support to terrorists terrorism?
What about the young Muslim men arrested in the U.S. last year for buying hundreds of dispoable cell phones which were sold to people who processed them into triggering devices for IEDs? What about counterfeit products, especially medical and food items?
Terrorism is asymetric warfare. It's not just the point of impact of an explosive attack.
You seem to want freedom from responsibility. Anarchistic agrarian existence will give you that. Very few people inside the U.S. are forced to stay here other than those who are incarcerated. There are people who have critical knowledge who have travel restrictions but, realistically, they could sneak out if they want. You're more than welcome to leave the U.S. if you chose. If you chose to be in a modern society, you will have to accept that society's means of enforcing accountability and pre-emptively protecting itself.
WRT the US Constitution, I agree that in some ways the Federal Government is operating way outside the letter and intent of the structure. Congress' use of interstate commerce and collusion with the court system to demand control of activities far outside their mandate is deplorable. At the same time, the Constitution does include the strucutre of creating laws as a means to adapt to changing times. It would be quite far-fetched to think the Founding Fathers could have visualized our technological age in the 1770s.
That's a very condescending comment considering you don't know anything about me or my knowledge and experience. Stick to the topic, not your personal angers.
Read what I typed, not what you want to warp it to state.
Laws can and are changed quite frequently and they are subject to interpretation over time. Additionally, I specifically mentioned publicly available data.
If your only concept of protection is responding after the fact, you are most certainly very foolish. A gun only smokes after it's fired. Far better to stop it from being fired in the first place. That is a universal principle. You are proposing only reactive actions, not preventative.
That attitude is certainly something you may chose for your life but such cavalier disregard for life is not held by responsible people.
There is no appreciable racial component of crime in America. The vast majority of civilian crimes happen within socio-economic groups. That is true at national, state, county and local levels of analysis.
There most certainly are pre-cursor activities which yield a very high level of predictability of future crimes. The term "repeat offender" has a very specific meaning. Pre-cursor activities by non-felons are certainly worthy of tracking, too. The legal terms "conpiracy" and "intent" are well established and valid.
You're more than welcome to prove me wrong. Use a credit card to buy a few hundred disposable cell phones and a ton or so of ammonia-based fertilizer.
Overzealous "privacy advocates" took things way too far when they attacked the government's collection of publicly available information. It's one thing to be concerned about the creation of travel dossiers but quite another thing to claim the government cannot compile the same information which is available to any Joe Blow (phone books, news articles, web postings, etc.) There is certainly a need for any society to have ability to protect itself by detecting the "bad guys" in its midst. There is also the aspect of "surrendering anonymity", to some extent, to have a modern society (drivers license, credit cards, medical records, etc.) The zealots have helped give credibility to the government's positions where it matters, in the courts and Congress. They sacrificed strategic "victory" for immediate publicity. Stupid.
This has been around for quite a long time, actually. The "challenge" with selling robotics into older industries isn't the lack of abilities, its' the FUD of the consumer and their general inability to define what they really want to happen. As an example, I've been selling pallet building robots. The customers comprehend the aspect of picking up and stacking the items on the pallet but almost universally cannot explain how they want identification attached to the loads. They will say, "it needs to do load tags." OK, what does that mean? Where does the information come from? Do they manually load a hopper with paper or is the system supposed to print. If so, how does it get the data and onto what, exactly, should it print? Customers also tend to be unrealistic and want a 100% replacement for a person with infinite adjustability and flexibility. It's not possible to completely replace all the capabilities of a human being. Specific tasks can be done faster, more accurately and more efficiently but completely replacing every conceivable thing a human body, let alone brain, can do? Not possible.
Moving shelves, controlled shuttling of bins, pick and pack have all been around for years and are in thousands of applications today. You can see some examples on the website of a company I represent: http://www.eutrolog.com/EN-US/soluzioni_04.asp You can also see a short video of a fully autonomous forklift which is part of a complete factory system on our website: http://www.corrugatedmachines.com/ (look at the fork lift video for Eutro Log)
Slashdot Mirror
Cute reply but ignorant of US military doctrinal and technological history. You are also confusing area denial with terror attacks. Doctrine always follows behind technological advances. Guided munitions weren't available then so rough saturation still needed to be used to take out targets.
You really don't know what you're talking about. Terror bombing isn't effective and hasn't been the U.S. strategy since WWII. Neutralizing enemy ability to wage war is the goal. Soldiers who are exposed to tear gas in training are being given experience so they can learn to handle exposure and degraded ability to function. They aren't allowed to use BC weapons but they have decontamination equipment and protective suits. They're not suicide zombies.
That's possible, too. If you were in the situation of being given valid orders to launch ICBMs, though, you were arguably already as good as dead. Common discussions were wether or not a dead body consumed more oxygen than a live one, if the chains that held the escape hatch doors were so long that the door would kill the person who tried to open it, where the escape tunnel ended (under the helicopter landing pad?), if the sand inside it had calcified or if there was enough room in the capsule to hold all the sand. There were food and water supplies but how long could that last and would you want to live? I don't remember anyone saying they would feel guilty, more wondering if it would be possible to survive.
Yup, just like the way U.S. infantry soldiers get to experience tear gas.
That guy's statement is so ridiculous, it's almost beyond belief. What possible legitimacy could exist for the idea that only a recipient of something is in a position to take a related action? Used as a principle, that idea means pure anarchy.
What has changed is the ability of an individual or small groups to have access to information and communication methods more so than in the past. That is true for EVERYONE. Additionally, "offensive" actions without responsibility to protect a geography are always and have always been far "easier" and far less expensive than defensive or state-protective actions. The premise of the article is nothing new. The same applied to the crossbow which the Pope declared would be so horrible a weapon that wars would cease, or metal projectiles or machine guns or trains or ... you name it. The more technology is available, of any type, the more technology can be used for "warfare". You can make poison gas in large quantities from items bought at any grocery store. BFD. The only people who would be stunned by the "revelation" of this article are the people who still think human wave assaults are used or that drug-addicted illiterates are tricked into military service. In the 1960s there were lenty of methods for distributing information (mimeograph machines, etc.) and lots of improvised munitions used for terrorist activities. The same was true in ... every war which proceeded all current wars ... and various civil situations. WTF, don't schools even mention the haymarket riots or assassinations any more? This article is as precient as those warnings on citrus-based cleaners not to drink them.
Minuteman II had 6 thumbwheels on the enable panel. The most common setting during a demonstration for visitors to the trainer was ENABLE. That's with the unclassified launch instructions which were a PR thing. ICBMs had far more stringent controls than theater weapons, though. Some of the Army's unclassified field manuals for tactical nukes were a joke, as if it would be possible to retrieve all the "friendlies" from the target area and go through multiple layers of command. ICBMS were very interconnected and no pistol would stop anybody bad enough to get into the complex and past the blast door. Pistols were the greatest threat to bored Missileer toes...
-- second odd confirmation phrase I've had for this post: "deterred"
You've watched War Games too much. The pistols were not to shoot the other guy. They were for defense in case someone managed to get downstairs and the blast doors weren't open. Far more than 4 critical stopping points, too. L7L7L7 was a common test setting in the trainers.
The cover sheet of any classified document states the highest classification of any of the contents.
FOIA is not declassification.
Declassified documents are clearly marked on each page, typically with a stamp which identifies the date and frequently the declassifying authority. This is to avoid false reports of unauthorized disclosure.
Tried to help you with your glaring ignorance. Ignorance is curable, stupidity isn't.
You've got the permanent conditon.
Strike three.
After I posted those comments I remembered Zyklon-B was originally a rat poison. I've never worked as an exterminator but I guess anyone doing that would want some kind of isolation suit if at all possible and the detox showers and everything that goes with it. I don't think I've ever seen ANY report about that in the media. You'd think there would be storage areas, office buildings, etc. which were vacant for a while and rats and such moved in.
There's a short description I read as a Freshman in College about the Nacirema people. For some reason, that popped into my head when I was reading the the wikileaks page. That's what got me to thinking about benign uses of the equipment. If you've never read that thing, Google the phrase. It's really good.
I won't agree with your conclusion about futility. Part of that is my outlook (and hope) but part is also the time frame. It's too soon to make a final conclusion. Some people say the Vietnam War was a failure, some say the strategic goal of stopping Communist expansion in that part of the world was accomplished. We've still got lots of military in Germany, officially as part of the post-WWII actions. Either "view" of the current conflict can probably pull together enough "facts" to support it. We'll just have to agree to disagree about that aspect.
Maybe the biochem equipment hasn't been discussed openly because the press has blown a lot of things out of proportion or maybe it was released to the press but they didn't want to bring it into the open because then the detox aspects might come up which would de-boogieman the issue quite a bit, who knows? By the time "news" gets to Joe Blow consumer, it's been through all kinds of filtering and selection. I've often wondered why the U.S. Government doesn't have some kind of more prominent news agency of its own so their view would be more easily found. I'd rather get information from the source than rely only on somebody else's edited presentation, regardless of any editorial slant. Seems to me that would help keep the free press reporting fact and separating editorial views from it more just as a free press helps hold the U.S. Government accountable.
I've walked by the TV when the Military Channel has some of the Army news playing, the stuff they create for themselves. I guess that and the various Government web sites kind of fill the function I'm trying to describe.
Your comments show you don't know what you don't know and you won't take correction.
Sorry, I meant to type "wikileaks" in the first line of this response. I've got "finger memory."
Assuming the wikipedia excerpts aren't taken out of context, the prohibition is against military USE, not possession. I remember as a kid our neighborhood hired a pest control company to spray some kind of fog which was toxic to mosquitos but harmless to people. DDT was used to de-louse people freed from the Nazi prison camps, similar to the way chemical dunking pits are used with livestock in the U.S. A crop duster plane could be used for dusting crops or dispersing biochem agents. I'd guess a man-portable gas dispenser could have all kinds of uses that aren't military, especially in a warm climate. Gas dispersion might be the most effective, least costly and quickest way to do some forms of detox on buildings. As irrigation is spread to more areas, maybe these will be used to help control pests.
The splash page has a few mentions of domestic use of agents but doesn't define what that means. The coallition forces have been autorized on numerous occassions to act as the law enforcement heavies for the various regional and national authorities in Iraq. That would certainly fit the description of domestic use. Certainly, they'd need to be prepared if there are riots or something like that.
Don't misunderstand what I'm stating to be endorsement for prohibitted use. I'm not saying there is cavalier use of equipment, or that there should be. I'm separating the existance of equipment/material from the projected uses as implied by wikileaks and Wired.
The U.S. has a permanent seat on the UN Security Council with full veto ability. The U.S. is also the vast bulk of just about any U.N. military activity. Are you proposing the U.S. would use its military to attack itself? There isn't any proof of breach because breach would be by use, not possession. Actually, since the coallition forces are fullfilling the earlier mandates of the U.N. wrt Saddam Hussein's Iraq, the U.N. would have to attack itself with troops which it doesn't have.
The cover page is clearly labelled Unclassified.
Thank you for playing, please try again.
wikileaks might be "useful idiots" in this case. The document is four years old so it is most likely heavily outdated.
Wired throws in a few leftists editorial comments and totally misses the importance. If you were a captured Arab terrorist, where would you rather be, at Guantanamo or in a Turkish/Egyptian/Saudi jail? "Hmmm...food, tropical weather and safety from other people or...a Middle Eastern prison...tough decision." Wired must not know the definition of repatriation.
It's also possible this was "leaked" for positive PR to conclusively demonstrate a lot of attention to caring for the physical and spiritual needs of the detained combatants, especially when compared to the terrorist manuals which are around.
Not really a correction, you're refining what I stated. Provocative dress is provocative because it...provokes. In some venues, that's what women want.
I don't know how anyone could draw your conclusion unless they're looking only at areas which have very heavy fundamentalist domination. There's certainly appreciable freedom in the north and urban areas. Iraq is about the same size as California. Socially acceptable dress for a woman in parts of San Francisco isn't accepted in small, rural towns. The same is and was true in Iraq.
btw, I really appreciate your conversive tone. Too often posts here are like the Monty Python skit ARgument Clinic.
Uh...the "bad guys" don't limit what "they" do based on what "we" do. They've been beheading and torturing far longer than "we've" been "there."
If you concept actually applied, wouldn't "they" be lining up to go to the tropical paradise at Guantanamo where they get clean clothes, good food, wonderful weather, new Korans, etc.?
What you propose is like "head they win, tails we lose."
Phosphorus and magnesium have some wonderful qualities for pyrotechnics. There's a huge difference between using it for that and using it in offensive weapons.
Likewise, I suppose tear gas could be compared to VX and mustard gas the same way a BB gun could be compared to an actual rifle. Tear gas has a very short term effect and doesn't main or kill. It's used for temporary non-lethal control and intimidation. If someone was shooting me with a BB gun, it would have the same effect of keeping me physically separate from them or otherwise change my actions. Hmmm...that's not a perfect analogy. A Red Rider BB gun could shoot your eye out, kid.
I see quite a few "convenient allusions" on the wikileaks splash page. As an example, they show the presentation slide of truck-mounted biological agent factories and say the U.S. "conveniently" has portable labs like that in Iraq now. There is no mention, whatsoever, that manufacturing antidotes for biochem agents can only be done with the same type of equipment and those anti-agents have a relatively short lifespan. The contents of a hospital or dentist's office could be reported in such a way to make it appear as a torture chamber. Many biological agents are slight variations on relatively benign entities. They work by tricking the human body's immune system. It's not unreasonable to have these types of facilities available locally to quickly evaluate any discovered substances and create antidotes or to neutralize them by processing them into something benign. It would be highly irresponsible NOT to have the facilities available.
wikileaks' "analysis" isn't divided into factual statements and editorial interpretation, it's all intermixed. That's unfortunate.
Well, come on, that's not the whole story. Rape as a means to control and punish citizens (subjects? What's the proper word for the people who live in a dictatorship? That's a serious question. "Citizens" seems more appropriate to republics and democracies. "Subjects" are under royal rule...) The "average" or "common" woman in Saddam's Iraq probably wasn't dressing in a highly provocative manner because that would draw attention.
We will have to agree to disagree about what are acceptable societal losses due to crime, warfare and terrorism. Apparently, we will also have to agree to disagree on the definition of terrorism. Is extortion terrorism? Is providing material support to terrorists terrorism?
What about the young Muslim men arrested in the U.S. last year for buying hundreds of dispoable cell phones which were sold to people who processed them into triggering devices for IEDs? What about counterfeit products, especially medical and food items?
Terrorism is asymetric warfare. It's not just the point of impact of an explosive attack.
You seem to want freedom from responsibility. Anarchistic agrarian existence will give you that. Very few people inside the U.S. are forced to stay here other than those who are incarcerated. There are people who have critical knowledge who have travel restrictions but, realistically, they could sneak out if they want. You're more than welcome to leave the U.S. if you chose. If you chose to be in a modern society, you will have to accept that society's means of enforcing accountability and pre-emptively protecting itself.
WRT the US Constitution, I agree that in some ways the Federal Government is operating way outside the letter and intent of the structure. Congress' use of interstate commerce and collusion with the court system to demand control of activities far outside their mandate is deplorable. At the same time, the Constitution does include the strucutre of creating laws as a means to adapt to changing times. It would be quite far-fetched to think the Founding Fathers could have visualized our technological age in the 1770s.
Your comment is non-sensical. I said the "privacy advocates" weakened their position by "crying wolf" too often.
That's a very condescending comment considering you don't know anything about me or my knowledge and experience. Stick to the topic, not your personal angers.
Read what I typed, not what you want to warp it to state.
Laws can and are changed quite frequently and they are subject to interpretation over time. Additionally, I specifically mentioned publicly available data.
If your only concept of protection is responding after the fact, you are most certainly very foolish. A gun only smokes after it's fired. Far better to stop it from being fired in the first place. That is a universal principle. You are proposing only reactive actions, not preventative.
That attitude is certainly something you may chose for your life but such cavalier disregard for life is not held by responsible people.
There is no appreciable racial component of crime in America. The vast majority of civilian crimes happen within socio-economic groups. That is true at national, state, county and local levels of analysis.
There most certainly are pre-cursor activities which yield a very high level of predictability of future crimes. The term "repeat offender" has a very specific meaning. Pre-cursor activities by non-felons are certainly worthy of tracking, too. The legal terms "conpiracy" and "intent" are well established and valid.
You're more than welcome to prove me wrong. Use a credit card to buy a few hundred disposable cell phones and a ton or so of ammonia-based fertilizer.
Overzealous "privacy advocates" took things way too far when they attacked the government's collection of publicly available information. It's one thing to be concerned about the creation of travel dossiers but quite another thing to claim the government cannot compile the same information which is available to any Joe Blow (phone books, news articles, web postings, etc.) There is certainly a need for any society to have ability to protect itself by detecting the "bad guys" in its midst. There is also the aspect of "surrendering anonymity", to some extent, to have a modern society (drivers license, credit cards, medical records, etc.) The zealots have helped give credibility to the government's positions where it matters, in the courts and Congress. They sacrificed strategic "victory" for immediate publicity. Stupid.
This has been around for quite a long time, actually. The "challenge" with selling robotics into older industries isn't the lack of abilities, its' the FUD of the consumer and their general inability to define what they really want to happen. As an example, I've been selling pallet building robots. The customers comprehend the aspect of picking up and stacking the items on the pallet but almost universally cannot explain how they want identification attached to the loads. They will say, "it needs to do load tags." OK, what does that mean? Where does the information come from? Do they manually load a hopper with paper or is the system supposed to print. If so, how does it get the data and onto what, exactly, should it print? Customers also tend to be unrealistic and want a 100% replacement for a person with infinite adjustability and flexibility. It's not possible to completely replace all the capabilities of a human being. Specific tasks can be done faster, more accurately and more efficiently but completely replacing every conceivable thing a human body, let alone brain, can do? Not possible.
Moving shelves, controlled shuttling of bins, pick and pack have all been around for years and are in thousands of applications today. You can see some examples on the website of a company I represent: http://www.eutrolog.com/EN-US/soluzioni_04.asp You can also see a short video of a fully autonomous forklift which is part of a complete factory system on our website: http://www.corrugatedmachines.com/ (look at the fork lift video for Eutro Log)
I forgot to mention in the other reply that you also don't seem to understand economics.
Everything you post also reads like regurgitated Undergraduate 101 junk. We will just have to agree to disagree.