One thing that will keep these from replacing a human is emergency procedures. Even with redundant systems something could go wrong that this computer can't fix.
Also, at least for the time being, most people wouldn't trust a computer to fly them anywhere. It's true that autopilot can do a lot, but most people don't think of it because they know there's a human being at the controls.
That's kind of what happened to me with Tolkien. I was reading LotR and then I read "On Fairy Stories" for a SF/Fantasy class in college. It soured my opinion of Mr. Tolkien. I imagine his reactions to modern fantasy authors listing him as a mentor would be akin to Segovia's take on the Beatles.
However, let's not forget that Hyshot's flight path was toward earth. Also the scramjet worked in the last few seconds before it crashed into the earth. NASA's test was a horizontal flight high in the atmosphere.
I do that all the time. I carry a small bag of red shirts with me everywhere I go. Meet an annoying person; I hand them a shirt. They die later on. Usually of either phaser burns, tetryonic evisceration or some beam weapon of unknown type.
My dad used to administer shots like this in the Air Force during Vietnam. You are exactly right. Pain level is determined by skill of the admin and by how still you can be. Twitch or move and it hurts.
If AI will become the next generations "killer app" (for lack of a better term) will we see things like AI cards? I know that most AI is processed by the CPU, but if the AI is too advanced might a separate add on card work well? Also, will we see some sort of basic AI programming environment. Something like DirectAI or OpenAI? I hope they start working on AI more than graphics.
Morrowind was a great game, but it wouldn't work as a MMORPG. However, with adanced AI it would be like entering the world of Mournhold.
As far as current games pushing AI forward; it seems like Fable from Molyneaux is the leader (we hope).
This is exactly what I'm trying to say. Computers with limited user options should be migrated to Linux as soon as possible. And for all-purpose computers (email, word processing, online CBTS) the Air Force should look into a custom USAFLinux. But as far as I know, there is no USAFLinux, yet. Like I've said before, I'm sure it's coming.
That's great, but isn't there a difference between changing an individuals OS and a branch of the military? I'm not IT and I don't work with IT people so I can't tell you if they are looking for a better solution or not. I would imagine that the are.
I used pilots as an example because they are smart. I'm saying that just because someone is smart enough to be a pilot doesn't mean they are a great computer user. And in my opinion switching to Linux would cause problems. I'm not saying it shouldn't be considered or that Linux is inferior. In fact, I believe that in a few years the military will either develop its own version of Linux for its needs or MS will create a military version of Windows.
Yeah, we've got a Win box. And that is a system that could use Linux with no problems at all. It's pretty much a single use system. We would have no problems switching to Linux there.
As far as C-5s go, their big, very big. They also break a lot. They do have flight attendants are a lot more comfortable for passengers than 17s, 131s, or 141s.
>>MS is the best way to do it
>nice assumption.
Ok, I shouldn't have said that, because it's not what I meant exactly. I wasn't trying to say MS software is the best. I should have said that switching to Linux would cause more problems at this point than it would solve.
Some people have problem with Outlook not because Outlook is tough, or even that they're dumb, it's that they're just not computer oriented. Just because they fly a plane doesn't mean they are more computer literate than the average user.
I'm not sure why people keep bringing up other parts of the Air Force. I don't know anything aobut the SIGINT you're talking about. I was only referencing my squadron/base. I agree with what you've said and I believe that Linux will work it's way into the military at one point. But right now I think it would disrupt operations more than help.
I don't think I have the best way. Though, I don't think there is a Linux solution that could step in a make everything better either.
As far as me beging a grunt, I guess. I know as much about $1000 toilet seats and $2300 wrenches as you know about what a loadmaster does.
And I'd take DOS over Win98 on the ADTD. Like I said in another post, the ADTD should run Linux.
There seems to be a lot of confusion when I said, "MS is the best way to do it" first I had a few beers second, I should have said MS is the path of least resistance. Linux would be a better choice since military computers are usually pretty limited use. If the software was good there shouldn't be too much of a problem, but I don't know if the software we use is available. This relates to not giving experiences with non-MS apps. Most everything we use is MS. We do use F.A.S.T.T and people get along with it as long as they've been trained on it.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that pilots were dumb or incapable of learning Linux. I just used them as an example to show that even they have problems using standard Windows. You can imagine the 18 or 19 year old Airman who has only seen Windows in his high school computer lab and for his Air Force computer based training.
I know the Air Force has computer savvy people, but I'm talking about my squadron and people I know. Some are computer literate, and others not so much. Don't get me started on the reserves. All I have to say about that is section six (Hey there McChord Reserves).
You are right, MS is a way. A custom Linux system would be a lot better, but that's just not an option that can be employed right now (opstempo, availability). Like I said in another post, Linux can and should be used in a few systems, but for our main terminals Win gets the job done. Poor guys just learned F.A.S.T.T. I pity the IT guy that tells them they need to learn Linux. We'd have a combat offload accident that night.
Hang on a second.. If they have to be taught how to burn a CD in Windows, how is that any different than Linux?
For me and other more computer savvy users there wouldn't really be a difference. For others it would most likely just be a mental thing. Some people are intimidated by computers and a new UI could bother them. Other than that, as long as your system is setup right there really wouldn't be a difference. Which brings us to How is that any better than, say, a custom US Air Force version of Linux that has a shortcut on the desktop to a CD burning application or script?
I firmly believe that the military will go to a Linux solution within the next 10-20 years. But they need, as you say, a custom version for their needs. The reason I think this isn't happening now is because the people that make these decisions didn't grow up with computers or Linux. They just went to E-Pubs which will save us millions of dollars a year. It took a long time to switch because they don't completely trust the technology. As Linux becomes more common and fresh blood moves up the chain Linux will become a more viable alternative, but right now it's a tough sell.
Switching to Linux on our all-purpose systems could be done, but it would be rough for awhile. And with our current opstempo I just don't see any commanders going for it. However, there are a few systems they should switch right away.
1. C-17 ADTD (Aircrew Data Transfer Device)
The ADTD is just a laptop on the plane for doing the form F (weight and balance) and for viewing E-Pubs (Acrobat). There is no reason this computer should use Win 98. This is a streamlined system where up time is critical.
2. Boeing Computer Based Training
These systems are nothing more than terminals used for training. They don't connect to the internet or even the base intranet. You log in, start the training file and that's it. They could save a lot by dumping WinXP on these machines.
3. Simulators
Again, a system where uptime and reliability is critical. Also, the sim has one function. A stripped Linux would be a lot better than Windows.
MS is the best way to do it. I'm Aircrew in the Air Force on the C-17 Globemaster. We have pilots who are in charge of a 320 million dollar airframe but can't figure out Outlook. We just got E-Pubs and with it pages of documentation on how to burn a CD using WinXP. If they went to Linux we'd have major problems. Most people would be reduced to a corp of Patrick Ewings. They'd all be bumbling around the flight deck bumping into one other. Are you trying to kill me?
Actually, with broadband technology, most porn browsers want downloadable content. Streaming video and such is seen as cheap and a ripoff. The industry would rather replace streaming content with a Circuit City Divx type solution. Where content can be downloaded and viewed for a certain period. But, like I said, users want downloadable content. Porn producers would probably rather give us what we want and just produce more rather than try and make us buy the same content over.
That's what most people think. It seems plausible since most games don't use the hard drive much. Halo and Morrowind use the caching feature, but most games don't. And the custom soundtrack feature isn't supported well, either. You're probably right that the hard drive will be an upgrade feature for PVR and media functions. I assume the memory installed will allow for cache and content downloads.
Join the Air Force. Be a C-17 Loadmaster. Monthly A1C check - $1079 Per Diem/Hazard Pay/Flight Pay/Tax Free - $2000 Free beer from the AC while in Germany in the name of crew solidarity - Priceless
They still claim to be working on the TCap. Except Shulman is no longer the CEO, he's just the chief research scientist for CSS (Computer Sales and Service). I kinda miss ACC's claims. It always led to a good discussion with lots of techno-babble. And I do love that there techno-babble.
Slashdot Mirror
Bodies of US soldiers (which we're not allowed to see)
Seriously, why do you think the general public should be allowed to see the bodies?
One thing that will keep these from replacing a human is emergency procedures. Even with redundant systems something could go wrong that this computer can't fix.
Also, at least for the time being, most people wouldn't trust a computer to fly them anywhere. It's true that autopilot can do a lot, but most people don't think of it because they know there's a human being at the controls.
That's kind of what happened to me with Tolkien. I was reading LotR and then I read "On Fairy Stories" for a SF/Fantasy class in college. It soured my opinion of Mr. Tolkien. I imagine his reactions to modern fantasy authors listing him as a mentor would be akin to Segovia's take on the Beatles.
best. . .post. . .ever.
I agree. One should never underestimate the power of human stupidity when it comes to computers.
And that's the way we liked it!
Yeah, it's Hyshot
However, let's not forget that Hyshot's flight path was toward earth. Also the scramjet worked in the last few seconds before it crashed into the earth. NASA's test was a horizontal flight high in the atmosphere.
I do that all the time. I carry a small bag of red shirts with me everywhere I go. Meet an annoying person; I hand them a shirt. They die later on. Usually of either phaser burns, tetryonic evisceration or some beam weapon of unknown type.
My dad used to administer shots like this in the Air Force during Vietnam. You are exactly right. Pain level is determined by skill of the admin and by how still you can be. Twitch or move and it hurts.
If AI will become the next generations "killer app" (for lack of a better term) will we see things like AI cards? I know that most AI is processed by the CPU, but if the AI is too advanced might a separate add on card work well? Also, will we see some sort of basic AI programming environment. Something like DirectAI or OpenAI? I hope they start working on AI more than graphics.
Morrowind was a great game, but it wouldn't work as a MMORPG. However, with adanced AI it would be like entering the world of Mournhold.
As far as current games pushing AI forward; it seems like Fable from Molyneaux is the leader (we hope).
This is exactly what I'm trying to say. Computers with limited user options should be migrated to Linux as soon as possible. And for all-purpose computers (email, word processing, online CBTS) the Air Force should look into a custom USAFLinux. But as far as I know, there is no USAFLinux, yet. Like I've said before, I'm sure it's coming.
That's great, but isn't there a difference between changing an individuals OS and a branch of the military? I'm not IT and I don't work with IT people so I can't tell you if they are looking for a better solution or not. I would imagine that the are.
I used pilots as an example because they are smart. I'm saying that just because someone is smart enough to be a pilot doesn't mean they are a great computer user. And in my opinion switching to Linux would cause problems. I'm not saying it shouldn't be considered or that Linux is inferior. In fact, I believe that in a few years the military will either develop its own version of Linux for its needs or MS will create a military version of Windows.
Yeah, we've got a Win box. And that is a system that could use Linux with no problems at all. It's pretty much a single use system. We would have no problems switching to Linux there. As far as C-5s go, their big, very big. They also break a lot. They do have flight attendants are a lot more comfortable for passengers than 17s, 131s, or 141s.
Pages of documentation equals step by step instructions with pictures.
>>MS is the best way to do it >nice assumption. Ok, I shouldn't have said that, because it's not what I meant exactly. I wasn't trying to say MS software is the best. I should have said that switching to Linux would cause more problems at this point than it would solve. Some people have problem with Outlook not because Outlook is tough, or even that they're dumb, it's that they're just not computer oriented. Just because they fly a plane doesn't mean they are more computer literate than the average user. I'm not sure why people keep bringing up other parts of the Air Force. I don't know anything aobut the SIGINT you're talking about. I was only referencing my squadron/base. I agree with what you've said and I believe that Linux will work it's way into the military at one point. But right now I think it would disrupt operations more than help. I don't think I have the best way. Though, I don't think there is a Linux solution that could step in a make everything better either. As far as me beging a grunt, I guess. I know as much about $1000 toilet seats and $2300 wrenches as you know about what a loadmaster does. And I'd take DOS over Win98 on the ADTD. Like I said in another post, the ADTD should run Linux.
There seems to be a lot of confusion when I said, "MS is the best way to do it" first I had a few beers second, I should have said MS is the path of least resistance. Linux would be a better choice since military computers are usually pretty limited use. If the software was good there shouldn't be too much of a problem, but I don't know if the software we use is available. This relates to not giving experiences with non-MS apps. Most everything we use is MS. We do use F.A.S.T.T and people get along with it as long as they've been trained on it.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that pilots were dumb or incapable of learning Linux. I just used them as an example to show that even they have problems using standard Windows. You can imagine the 18 or 19 year old Airman who has only seen Windows in his high school computer lab and for his Air Force computer based training.
I know the Air Force has computer savvy people, but I'm talking about my squadron and people I know. Some are computer literate, and others not so much. Don't get me started on the reserves. All I have to say about that is section six (Hey there McChord Reserves).
You are right, MS is a way. A custom Linux system would be a lot better, but that's just not an option that can be employed right now (opstempo, availability). Like I said in another post, Linux can and should be used in a few systems, but for our main terminals Win gets the job done. Poor guys just learned F.A.S.T.T. I pity the IT guy that tells them they need to learn Linux. We'd have a combat offload accident that night.
Hang on a second.. If they have to be taught how to burn a CD in Windows, how is that any different than Linux?
For me and other more computer savvy users there wouldn't really be a difference. For others it would most likely just be a mental thing. Some people are intimidated by computers and a new UI could bother them. Other than that, as long as your system is setup right there really wouldn't be a difference. Which brings us to
How is that any better than, say, a custom US Air Force version of Linux that has a shortcut on the desktop to a CD burning application or script?
I firmly believe that the military will go to a Linux solution within the next 10-20 years. But they need, as you say, a custom version for their needs. The reason I think this isn't happening now is because the people that make these decisions didn't grow up with computers or Linux. They just went to E-Pubs which will save us millions of dollars a year. It took a long time to switch because they don't completely trust the technology. As Linux becomes more common and fresh blood moves up the chain Linux will become a more viable alternative, but right now it's a tough sell.
Switching to Linux on our all-purpose systems could be done, but it would be rough for awhile. And with our current opstempo I just don't see any commanders going for it. However, there are a few systems they should switch right away.
1. C-17 ADTD (Aircrew Data Transfer Device)
The ADTD is just a laptop on the plane for doing the form F (weight and balance) and for viewing E-Pubs (Acrobat). There is no reason this computer should use Win 98. This is a streamlined system where up time is critical.
2. Boeing Computer Based Training
These systems are nothing more than terminals used for training. They don't connect to the internet or even the base intranet. You log in, start the training file and that's it. They could save a lot by dumping WinXP on these machines.
3. Simulators
Again, a system where uptime and reliability is critical. Also, the sim has one function. A stripped Linux would be a lot better than Windows.
MS is the best way to do it. I'm Aircrew in the Air Force on the C-17 Globemaster. We have pilots who are in charge of a 320 million dollar airframe but can't figure out Outlook. We just got E-Pubs and with it pages of documentation on how to burn a CD using WinXP. If they went to Linux we'd have major problems. Most people would be reduced to a corp of Patrick Ewings. They'd all be bumbling around the flight deck bumping into one other. Are you trying to kill me?
Actually, with broadband technology, most porn browsers want downloadable content. Streaming video and such is seen as cheap and a ripoff. The industry would rather replace streaming content with a Circuit City Divx type solution. Where content can be downloaded and viewed for a certain period. But, like I said, users want downloadable content. Porn producers would probably rather give us what we want and just produce more rather than try and make us buy the same content over.
It's no longer SNL: The Unfunny Years Channel. It is now the MadTV Again? Channel. At least SNL was funny at one point.
That's what most people think. It seems plausible since most games don't use the hard drive much. Halo and Morrowind use the caching feature, but most games don't. And the custom soundtrack feature isn't supported well, either. You're probably right that the hard drive will be an upgrade feature for PVR and media functions. I assume the memory installed will allow for cache and content downloads.
Join the Air Force. Be a C-17 Loadmaster.
Monthly A1C check - $1079
Per Diem/Hazard Pay/Flight Pay/Tax Free - $2000
Free beer from the AC while in Germany in the name of crew solidarity - Priceless
They still claim to be working on the TCap. Except Shulman is no longer the CEO, he's just the chief research scientist for CSS (Computer Sales and Service). I kinda miss ACC's claims. It always led to a good discussion with lots of techno-babble. And I do love that there techno-babble.
Donny, you're out of your element.