It specifically says "unmanned". Your friend will be unaffected. Not that I agree with this ridiculous legislation, just that he has nothing to worry about.
Well let's define the near future. The original article said next generation. Which to me could be 20-30 years (think 4th to 5th generation fighter jets) or it could be 5. But even then, planes could be piloted within radio range instead of satellite under certain scenarios, that's already done with drones.
Realistically, they will detect each other, just a matter of range. Nothing is invisible, and with modern ISRT it doesn't matter how low your radar cross-section (RCS) is, because as long as you generate heat to create thrust, IRST can find you.
Of course, so do I. My point is the US has relatively solid evidence that the attacks are from the Chinese government. the Mandiant report linked them to the Chinese beyond simply using the source address. The Chinese don't have any proof beyond the fact that they come from US address space. That could be anyone using a compromised computer in ARIN address space.
The Mandiant report links the attacks to the Chinese government. To a specific group in a specific location during business hours Beijing local time. The Chinese see attacks from US IP address and blame US.
So I want a laptop with a REALLY nice REALLY high res display, a great keyboard and trackpad. The touchscreen shit I don't really care about. Other than a Macbook Pro 13" retina for $200 more, what are my options other than the Pixel? Everyone seems to hate the Pixel, so what are my options? It seemed like throwing Ubuntu on the Pixel made the most sense to me.
So you think the rest of the world is scared the US might attack them, and that's why they sanction Iran? Europe is afraid of being attacked by America? CHINA???
1) This all assumes that we won't just have fully autonomous aircraft. In a few decades the planes will completely fly themselves and we'll just have someone remotely tell them what they're allowed to kill (same as we do now actually). They won't need any more connectivity than our pilots do today.
2) Air-Air dogfighting is dead. This isn't 1986. Now it's just a matter of how far out you can get a missile lock using AESA/IRST. 50 nautical miles? 100? It's all about who can hit who with beyond-visual-range missiles now.
F-22 would absolutely decimate F-15 and F-18, the previous generation of air-air combat jets. Not even a contest. Those planes would never even see the F-22 on their radar before they were blown out of the air.
Actually, we'll just replace remote pilots with full autonomous aircraft eventually. All we need is a human to say whether or not you can engage a target, just like we do now with real pilots. Then the computer takes over and kills whatever you told it to.
The eventual goal will be to have the planes be completely autonomous. Eventually we won't need to remotely pilot the drones. They'll be totally autonomous and they'll be able to react much faster than any human pilot and perform maneuvers that would kill a human pilot in the cockpit. Then we just have a guy sitting somewhere monitoring it's radar and irst and just saying "yes you can kill that" or "no you cannot". It's the obvious end game. But, dogfighting is dead anyway. Now it's just about how many miles out can you "see" the target and fire your BVR missile before he sees you.
Don't worry, in 100 years it will just be robots vs robots and when they run out of robots on one side they'll give up because the thought of an actual human dying in war will be bizarre.
Interesting point. Really bizarre brinkmanship ship by the Iranians. Riding the line between giving their citizens the impression that the powers in place can defend them and getting the appropriate attention on the world stage without being invaded.
Of course they won't use them, because the world will bow to pressure from the Iranians for whatever they want. Aid, trade, etc. The same shit the DPRK does now. The point is the world doesn't need the nutcases in Iran holding nuclear weapons over everyone's heads.
How in the world is this moddest insightful? Westboro is like half a dozen people, this is thousands of islamists violently attacking and killing people.
1) We use drones in countries we aren't at war with, daily. You are clearly so uneducated on the use of drones there isn't much reason to have a discussion with you about it. "We" can mean any and all of the above. Take your pick. Of course we need to determine how drones can be used. No one's arguing that. All I said was that drones aren't only used during "war". So to call drones "instruments of war" is misleading at best. It's fear mongering.
2) Irrelevant to what I said and somehow implies I disagree with any of that.
3) Obviously the point.
4) Here I'll just choose to ignore your ad hominem attacks that are older than the internet.
What happened to Slashdot? This entire comment section is people suggesting MAC filtering and not broadcasting the SSID, or even calling the police. Are you kidding me?
Slashdot Mirror
Or maybe you could explain why the crime rate in England is higher overall?
Using your logic, looks like you guys need more guns.
Care to explain why there are more rapes per capita in England then?
It specifically says "unmanned". Your friend will be unaffected. Not that I agree with this ridiculous legislation, just that he has nothing to worry about.
There's already a signed shim loader. Please go back under your rock, troll.
No problem! It's one of my favorites :)
Well let's define the near future. The original article said next generation. Which to me could be 20-30 years (think 4th to 5th generation fighter jets) or it could be 5. But even then, planes could be piloted within radio range instead of satellite under certain scenarios, that's already done with drones.
Realistically, they will detect each other, just a matter of range. Nothing is invisible, and with modern ISRT it doesn't matter how low your radar cross-section (RCS) is, because as long as you generate heat to create thrust, IRST can find you.
Of course, so do I. My point is the US has relatively solid evidence that the attacks are from the Chinese government. the Mandiant report linked them to the Chinese beyond simply using the source address. The Chinese don't have any proof beyond the fact that they come from US address space. That could be anyone using a compromised computer in ARIN address space.
The Mandiant report links the attacks to the Chinese government. To a specific group in a specific location during business hours Beijing local time. The Chinese see attacks from US IP address and blame US.
So I want a laptop with a REALLY nice REALLY high res display, a great keyboard and trackpad. The touchscreen shit I don't really care about. Other than a Macbook Pro 13" retina for $200 more, what are my options other than the Pixel? Everyone seems to hate the Pixel, so what are my options? It seemed like throwing Ubuntu on the Pixel made the most sense to me.
So you think the rest of the world is scared the US might attack them, and that's why they sanction Iran? Europe is afraid of being attacked by America? CHINA???
1) This all assumes that we won't just have fully autonomous aircraft. In a few decades the planes will completely fly themselves and we'll just have someone remotely tell them what they're allowed to kill (same as we do now actually). They won't need any more connectivity than our pilots do today.
2) Air-Air dogfighting is dead. This isn't 1986. Now it's just a matter of how far out you can get a missile lock using AESA/IRST. 50 nautical miles? 100? It's all about who can hit who with beyond-visual-range missiles now.
F-22 would absolutely decimate F-15 and F-18, the previous generation of air-air combat jets. Not even a contest. Those planes would never even see the F-22 on their radar before they were blown out of the air.
Actually, we'll just replace remote pilots with full autonomous aircraft eventually. All we need is a human to say whether or not you can engage a target, just like we do now with real pilots. Then the computer takes over and kills whatever you told it to.
The eventual goal will be to have the planes be completely autonomous. Eventually we won't need to remotely pilot the drones. They'll be totally autonomous and they'll be able to react much faster than any human pilot and perform maneuvers that would kill a human pilot in the cockpit. Then we just have a guy sitting somewhere monitoring it's radar and irst and just saying "yes you can kill that" or "no you cannot". It's the obvious end game. But, dogfighting is dead anyway. Now it's just about how many miles out can you "see" the target and fire your BVR missile before he sees you.
Don't worry, in 100 years it will just be robots vs robots and when they run out of robots on one side they'll give up because the thought of an actual human dying in war will be bizarre.
Interesting point. Really bizarre brinkmanship ship by the Iranians. Riding the line between giving their citizens the impression that the powers in place can defend them and getting the appropriate attention on the world stage without being invaded.
You can call the US evil all day, the problem is the rest of the world agrees with us.
I don't know, which country has international sanctions against them?
Of course they won't use them, because the world will bow to pressure from the Iranians for whatever they want. Aid, trade, etc. The same shit the DPRK does now. The point is the world doesn't need the nutcases in Iran holding nuclear weapons over everyone's heads.
How in the world is this moddest insightful? Westboro is like half a dozen people, this is thousands of islamists violently attacking and killing people.
1) We use drones in countries we aren't at war with, daily. You are clearly so uneducated on the use of drones there isn't much reason to have a discussion with you about it. "We" can mean any and all of the above. Take your pick. Of course we need to determine how drones can be used. No one's arguing that. All I said was that drones aren't only used during "war". So to call drones "instruments of war" is misleading at best. It's fear mongering.
2) Irrelevant to what I said and somehow implies I disagree with any of that.
3) Obviously the point.
4) Here I'll just choose to ignore your ad hominem attacks that are older than the internet.
What happened to Slashdot? This entire comment section is people suggesting MAC filtering and not broadcasting the SSID, or even calling the police. Are you kidding me?
And I can also spoof MAC addresses. MAC filtering is about 1/100th of a secure wireless network.
Someone is smart enough to attack WPS but you think not broadcasting the SSID will stop them? Ooooookie dokie.....