For the Artillery Shell, that is why I said to make it CAR portable as well.
As for the comment on how to get a device onto post, you would want to blend in, and class A's (depending on the post) is the *LAST* uniform you would want. You would stick out too much. As for taking my security training seriously, I guess so, being an MP for the last decade or so will do that to you I guess. And the funniest part of your comment is that your last sentence basically agrees with what I stated, that it was trivial to figure out how to get a device onto a post, but left it as an exercise for the reader.
I have not personally seen one, however, they exist. The United States (and Soviet Union) and I presume the other long time nuclear powers, have had "Suitcase" or backpack man-portable bombs for a while now. During the cold war there were several specific points in Europe where these were to be placed during a Warsaw Pact invasion. The warheads would detonate and crater/destroy key roads and mountain passes.
Man portable nuclear devices were/are about. There are also nuclear ARTILLERY rounds as well. To make one of those man-portable all you have to do is rig the detonation device to a manual timer or suicide button and throw that in your car or backpack.
You could arguable do the exact same with the warheads designed to go on an ICBM. It doesn't take much to make it man or "car" portable. As for the blast radius, it would be enough to seriously devestate most Air Force bases, and most Army posts as well. You use google maps to find the closest point to the building(s) you want to destroy, drive beside the fence line and detonate.
I just erased a paragraph that I wrote on how to actually get the bomb INSIDE the base you want to detonate it in... it is very easy to do, and trivial to figure out, but since I am in the military, it might be a bad idea if I were to spell it out for someone who was going to actually do it. Suffice to say it is easy for you, or anyone else to get on to 99.5% of all US military bases for the purposes of destroying things.
Dusted this off from the rec.arts.humor archive... It seemed appropriate.
From:
Subject: The truth about 'C++' revealed
Date: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 5:20 AM
On the 1st of January, 1998, Bjarne Stroustrup gave an interview to the
IEEE's 'Computer' magazine.
Naturally, the editors thought he would be giving a retrospective view
of seven years of object-oriented design, using the language he
created.
By the end of the interview, the interviewer got more than he had
bargained for and, subsequently, the editor decided to suppress its
contents, 'for the good of the industry' but, as with many of these
things, there was a leak.
Here is a complete transcript of what was was said, unedited, and
unrehearsed, so it isn't as neat as planned interviews.
Interviewer: Well, it's been a few years since you changed the world
of software design, how does it feel, looking back?
Stroustrup: Actually, I was thinking about those days, just before you
arrived. Do you remember? Everyone was writing 'C' and, the trouble
was, they were pretty damn good at it. Universities got pretty good at
teaching it, too. They were turning out competent - I stress the word
'competent' - graduates at a phenomenal rate. That's what caused the
problem.
Interviewer: problem?
Stroustrup: Yes, problem. Remember when everyone wrote Cobol?
Interviewer: Of course, I did too
Stroustrup: Well, in the beginning, these guys were like demi-gods.
Their salaries were high, and they were treated like royalty.
Interviewer: Those were the days, eh?
Stroustrup: Right. So what happened? IBM got sick of it, and
invested millions in training programmers, till they were a dime a
dozen.
Interviewer: That's why I got out. Salaries dropped within a year, to
the point where being a journalist actually paid better.
Stroustrup: Exactly. Well, the same happened with 'C' programmers.
Interviewer: I see, but what's the point?
Stroustrup: Well, one day, when I was sitting in my office, I thought
of this little scheme, which would redress the balance a little. I
thought 'I wonder what would happen, if there were a language so
complicated, so difficult to learn, that nobody would ever be able to
swamp the market with programmers? Actually, I got some of the ideas
from X10, you know, X windows. That was such a bitch of a graphics
system, that it only just ran on those Sun 3/60 things. They had all
the ingredients for what I wanted. A really ridiculously complex
syntax, obscure functions, and pseudo-OO structure. Even now, nobody
writes raw X-windows code. Motif is the only way to go if you want to
retain your sanity.
[NJW Comment: That explains everything. Most of my thesis work was in
raw X-windows.:)]
Interviewer: You're kidding...?
Stroustrup: Not a bit of it. In fact, there was another problem. Unix
was written in 'C', which meant that any 'C' programmer could very
easily become a systems programmer. Remember what a mainframe systems
programmer used to earn?
Interviewer: You bet I do, that's what I used to do.
Stroustrup: OK, so this new language had to divorce itself from Unix,
by hiding all the system calls that bound the two together so nicely.
This would enable guys who only knew about DOS to earn a decent living
too.
Interviewer: I don't believe you said that...
Stroustrup: Well, it's been long enough, now, and I believe most
people have figured out for themselves that C++ is a waste of time but,
I must say, it's taken them a lot longer than I thought it would.
Interviewer: So how exactly did you do it?
Stroustrup: It was only supposed to be a joke, I never thought people
would take the book seriously.
Bear with me on this... it is a tad long, but worth it (I think at least).
OK, first things first. I am serving in the Army as an enlisted Military Policeman. Currently stationed at Fort Hood in the 1st Cavalry Division, I came back from a 1 year tour in Iraq in early/mid 2005. In Baghdad the military is using a "new" tool (that DARPA has been working on for a number of years) that easily allows collaborative efforts and battle tracking. (I just googled for it, and the name is out in the open with a nice description of it on defense-update.com... so it _appears_ that I am not "talking out of school" here.)
Anyway, last year around April/May the Cav returns back to the states, we get a little down time, turn most of our trucks and tanks to be "Reset" (rebuilt/refurbished/updated)... and catch a nice little breather when Katrina hits. The 82nd Airborne gets to New Orleans first (after the National Guard and reserves) and then the Cav.
Being an enlisted Military Policeman gave me a unique perspective to what was going on... and more importantly what was NOT going on. When I worked in Baghdad my job was to coordinate efforts between the Coalition Forces and the Iraqi Police. We tracked what the Iraqi Police were seeing on the Streets and what the military was seeing on the streets and tried to keep everybody on the same page.
Low and behold when I get to New Orleans I discover that I have the PERFECT skill set for this disaster. Military and Law Enforcement experience, VERY knowledgeable on how to push and pull information to and from everybody who needs it, dealing with ALL flavors of law enforcement and coordinating efforts on the fly.
One problem. I don't have a tool to put the coordination together. However, most places (hospitals, Police Stations, FBI, DEA, NYFD, Customs, and the FEMA coordination centers) all have Internet access. Guess what. We have the perfect tool... Google Earth.
Google had recently worked there ASSES off putting current and updated flood information into Google Earth, you could pull up where downed power lines and flooded roads were at, you could transpose the "pre flood" and the "post flood" images, and the downtown area even had 3D models of the buildings.
Oh, and IT WAS FREE... and easy to use... And you can EASILY share information between other people. I put an icon in my Google Earth.KML describing a dead body that needs to be picked up and the proper agencies (who are "subscribed" to my.KML) see that information in SECONDS (or minutes at the latest). There were a limited number of people there who could legally move bodies according to LA law so it was a constant effort to get them to where they needed to be.
You add a VOIP aspect to it and POOF! Instant command and control for the different agencies. It is nigh-impossible to crash google's servers and as long as you had power (which was rapidly becoming a NON issue) and Internet access (same thing) you were able to talk and coordinate your efforts.
The beauty of the system is that as long as each agency updates their little piece of the pie everybody can see and use that data... Even if they don't update it, there was so much overlap that someone would see and report an incident.
One other problem. We are dealing with the CIVILIAN government and FEMA here. They have a major case of "It wasn't grown here"-itis. Everybody I showed it to was amazed and astounded with how easy and efficient it was... and the power of collaboration was something completely new and foreign to almost EVERYBODY involved... except for the 1st Cav. FEMA seems hell bent to spend MILLIONS of dollars setting up a command and control center that only talked to itself... AMAZING. I showed their tech people and some higher ups what Google Earth could bring to the plate and they were impressed. The tech types were ready and willing to embrace the tool, but hesitant because t
Both make points, but neither gets it... yet.
on
Net Neutrality or Not?
·
· Score: 5, Funny
Congradulations, we now no longer have a moon, we have another planet that people mistakenly refer to as "The Moon". And we are no longer a single planet going around the sun, but a dual-planet system as out respective gravities have a pronounced effect on our ("The Earth" and "The Moon") orbits.
It will be interesting to see the "definition" they arrive at that will somehow define Mercury and (possibly) Pluto as "planets" and yet keep Luna from turning Earth into a dual-planet system. Not to mention the "moons" around Jupiter that are massive enough to have their own atmosphere.
For the record I believe our Moon isn't really a moon, it should qualify as another planet... however there is too much inertia built up in human history to make that radical of a change to what people "believe".
Having played with what they are talking about, you don't know how it works. You don't need to place it against a wall to see what is in the room (or rooms) beyond. There is a stand off mode where you can be 2-5 METERS away from the wall and "look inside".
The manufactures are looking at SWAT and the military as their primary users. First responders to a disaster are also a VERY big market.
You check the room to see it is clear. It will pick up motion, breathing, a fan, or someone walking around. Also, being one of the soldiers (I am a Military Policeman) who would use this "downrange" this is a VERY valuable tool to get an idea of what is past the door before your enter.
Heck, this would be useful for "Domestic Disturbances" in Garrison as well.
It is a good tool that with a couple of additions will be VERY VERY useful (ie. linking them together with GPS and deploying several around the residence you want to enter so you get a good idea of what is inside the building, THEN you link all that information together into a display that is worn in the glasses of your entry team... THAT is a useful tool.)
Slashdot Mirror
As for the comment on how to get a device onto post, you would want to blend in, and class A's (depending on the post) is the *LAST* uniform you would want. You would stick out too much. As for taking my security training seriously, I guess so, being an MP for the last decade or so will do that to you I guess. And the funniest part of your comment is that your last sentence basically agrees with what I stated, that it was trivial to figure out how to get a device onto a post, but left it as an exercise for the reader.
Man portable nuclear devices were/are about. There are also nuclear ARTILLERY rounds as well. To make one of those man-portable all you have to do is rig the detonation device to a manual timer or suicide button and throw that in your car or backpack.
You could arguable do the exact same with the warheads designed to go on an ICBM. It doesn't take much to make it man or "car" portable. As for the blast radius, it would be enough to seriously devestate most Air Force bases, and most Army posts as well. You use google maps to find the closest point to the building(s) you want to destroy, drive beside the fence line and detonate.
I just erased a paragraph that I wrote on how to actually get the bomb INSIDE the base you want to detonate it in... it is very easy to do, and trivial to figure out, but since I am in the military, it might be a bad idea if I were to spell it out for someone who was going to actually do it. Suffice to say it is easy for you, or anyone else to get on to 99.5% of all US military bases for the purposes of destroying things.
Sweet dreams.
From:
Subject: The truth about 'C++' revealed
Date: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 5:20 AM
On the 1st of January, 1998, Bjarne Stroustrup gave an interview to the IEEE's 'Computer' magazine.
Naturally, the editors thought he would be giving a retrospective view of seven years of object-oriented design, using the language he created.
By the end of the interview, the interviewer got more than he had bargained for and, subsequently, the editor decided to suppress its contents, 'for the good of the industry' but, as with many of these things, there was a leak.
Here is a complete transcript of what was was said, unedited, and unrehearsed, so it isn't as neat as planned interviews.
You will find it interesting...
__________________________________________________ ________________
Interviewer: Well, it's been a few years since you changed the world of software design, how does it feel, looking back?
Stroustrup: Actually, I was thinking about those days, just before you arrived. Do you remember? Everyone was writing 'C' and, the trouble was, they were pretty damn good at it. Universities got pretty good at teaching it, too. They were turning out competent - I stress the word 'competent' - graduates at a phenomenal rate. That's what caused the problem.
Interviewer: problem?
Stroustrup: Yes, problem. Remember when everyone wrote Cobol?
Interviewer: Of course, I did too
Stroustrup: Well, in the beginning, these guys were like demi-gods. Their salaries were high, and they were treated like royalty.
Interviewer: Those were the days, eh?
Stroustrup: Right. So what happened? IBM got sick of it, and invested millions in training programmers, till they were a dime a dozen.
Interviewer: That's why I got out. Salaries dropped within a year, to the point where being a journalist actually paid better.
Stroustrup: Exactly. Well, the same happened with 'C' programmers.
Interviewer: I see, but what's the point?
Stroustrup: Well, one day, when I was sitting in my office, I thought of this little scheme, which would redress the balance a little. I thought 'I wonder what would happen, if there were a language so complicated, so difficult to learn, that nobody would ever be able to swamp the market with programmers? Actually, I got some of the ideas from X10, you know, X windows. That was such a bitch of a graphics system, that it only just ran on those Sun 3/60 things. They had all the ingredients for what I wanted. A really ridiculously complex syntax, obscure functions, and pseudo-OO structure. Even now, nobody writes raw X-windows code. Motif is the only way to go if you want to retain your sanity.
[NJW Comment: That explains everything. Most of my thesis work was in raw X-windows. :)]
Interviewer: You're kidding...?
Stroustrup: Not a bit of it. In fact, there was another problem. Unix was written in 'C', which meant that any 'C' programmer could very easily become a systems programmer. Remember what a mainframe systems programmer used to earn?
Interviewer: You bet I do, that's what I used to do.
Stroustrup: OK, so this new language had to divorce itself from Unix, by hiding all the system calls that bound the two together so nicely. This would enable guys who only knew about DOS to earn a decent living too.
Interviewer: I don't believe you said that...
Stroustrup: Well, it's been long enough, now, and I believe most people have figured out for themselves that C++ is a waste of time but, I must say, it's taken them a lot longer than I thought it would.
Interviewer: So how exactly did you do it?
Stroustrup: It was only supposed to be a joke, I never thought people would take the book seriously.
OK, first things first. I am serving in the Army as an enlisted Military Policeman. Currently stationed at Fort Hood in the 1st Cavalry Division, I came back from a 1 year tour in Iraq in early/mid 2005. In Baghdad the military is using a "new" tool (that DARPA has been working on for a number of years) that easily allows collaborative efforts and battle tracking. (I just googled for it, and the name is out in the open with a nice description of it on defense-update.com ... so it _appears_ that I am not "talking out of school" here.)
Anyway, last year around April/May the Cav returns back to the states, we get a little down time, turn most of our trucks and tanks to be "Reset" (rebuilt/refurbished/updated) ... and catch a nice little breather when Katrina hits. The 82nd Airborne gets to New Orleans first (after the National Guard and reserves) and then the Cav.
Being an enlisted Military Policeman gave me a unique perspective to what was going on... and more importantly what was NOT going on. When I worked in Baghdad my job was to coordinate efforts between the Coalition Forces and the Iraqi Police. We tracked what the Iraqi Police were seeing on the Streets and what the military was seeing on the streets and tried to keep everybody on the same page.
Low and behold when I get to New Orleans I discover that I have the PERFECT skill set for this disaster. Military and Law Enforcement experience, VERY knowledgeable on how to push and pull information to and from everybody who needs it, dealing with ALL flavors of law enforcement and coordinating efforts on the fly.
One problem. I don't have a tool to put the coordination together. However, most places (hospitals, Police Stations, FBI, DEA, NYFD, Customs, and the FEMA coordination centers) all have Internet access. Guess what. We have the perfect tool... Google Earth.
Google had recently worked there ASSES off putting current and updated flood information into Google Earth, you could pull up where downed power lines and flooded roads were at, you could transpose the "pre flood" and the "post flood" images, and the downtown area even had 3D models of the buildings.
Oh, and IT WAS FREE... and easy to use... And you can EASILY share information between other people. I put an icon in my Google Earth .KML describing a dead body that needs to be picked up and the proper agencies (who are "subscribed" to my .KML) see that information in SECONDS (or minutes at the latest). There were a limited number of people there who could legally move bodies according to LA law so it was a constant effort to get them to where they needed to be.
You add a VOIP aspect to it and POOF! Instant command and control for the different agencies. It is nigh-impossible to crash google's servers and as long as you had power (which was rapidly becoming a NON issue) and Internet access (same thing) you were able to talk and coordinate your efforts.
The beauty of the system is that as long as each agency updates their little piece of the pie everybody can see and use that data... Even if they don't update it, there was so much overlap that someone would see and report an incident.
One other problem. We are dealing with the CIVILIAN government and FEMA here. They have a major case of "It wasn't grown here"-itis. Everybody I showed it to was amazed and astounded with how easy and efficient it was... and the power of collaboration was something completely new and foreign to almost EVERYBODY involved... except for the 1st Cav. FEMA seems hell bent to spend MILLIONS of dollars setting up a command and control center that only talked to itself... AMAZING. I showed their tech people and some higher ups what Google Earth could bring to the plate and they were impressed. The tech types were ready and willing to embrace the tool, but hesitant because t
Of the two, Craig Newmark makes the better argument... however, neither explains how we have already PAID for the access to the sites we visit. However, the BEST argument I have seen so far is the ninja from "Ask a Ninja" http://www.askaninja.com/news/2006/05/11/ask-a-nin ja-special-delivery-4-net-neutrality
Congradulations, we now no longer have a moon, we have another planet that people mistakenly refer to as "The Moon". And we are no longer a single planet going around the sun, but a dual-planet system as out respective gravities have a pronounced effect on our ("The Earth" and "The Moon") orbits.
It will be interesting to see the "definition" they arrive at that will somehow define Mercury and (possibly) Pluto as "planets" and yet keep Luna from turning Earth into a dual-planet system. Not to mention the "moons" around Jupiter that are massive enough to have their own atmosphere. For the record I believe our Moon isn't really a moon, it should qualify as another planet... however there is too much inertia built up in human history to make that radical of a change to what people "believe".
Having played with what they are talking about, you don't know how it works. You don't need to place it against a wall to see what is in the room (or rooms) beyond. There is a stand off mode where you can be 2-5 METERS away from the wall and "look inside". The manufactures are looking at SWAT and the military as their primary users. First responders to a disaster are also a VERY big market. You check the room to see it is clear. It will pick up motion, breathing, a fan, or someone walking around. Also, being one of the soldiers (I am a Military Policeman) who would use this "downrange" this is a VERY valuable tool to get an idea of what is past the door before your enter. Heck, this would be useful for "Domestic Disturbances" in Garrison as well. It is a good tool that with a couple of additions will be VERY VERY useful (ie. linking them together with GPS and deploying several around the residence you want to enter so you get a good idea of what is inside the building, THEN you link all that information together into a display that is worn in the glasses of your entry team... THAT is a useful tool.)