Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:And the big deal is what? (Score 1) 534

I find it hard to believe that we've come up with a completely silent turbo-prop and that they fly so high above the earth that they can't be seen.

Haven't seen anywhere in an article what they've been able to look at. All I can see is 'video' so not sure if that includes the infra-red stuff or not. Oops, sorry, don't wanna tip off the enemy. I mean the super-spooky, vodoo video.

The enemy knows exactly how those things work. You know how they found out? When the war started our side couldn't get enough video out to the news outlets to show how awesome we are.

Rule of thumb for insurgents: If you get buzzed by a drone they probably spotted you

Rule of thumb for US Military: If you buzz someone and they are holding a laptop and a satellite dish they spotted you

In all seriousness has it given them any advantage at all? Even with them seeing the images they haven't really countered them have they?

Comment Re:And the big deal is what? (Score 1) 534

The drone is flying over your head. It circled around and came back. Guess what? What ever you were doing drew a US operator. See how easy it is? And I didn't even *need* to see the video.

Figuring out better cover is easy too. Put a sandish colored tarp over what you're doing. Did the drone that just flew over come back? Bingo! You're probably golden. Has it come back 47 times in the last two days? I'd say you need a new tarp.

Comment And the big deal is what? (Score 1) 534

Honestly, what is the big deal?

FTA: '... the intercepts could give America's enemies battlefield advantages by removing the element of surprise from certain missions and making it easier for insurgents to determine which roads and buildings are under US surveillance.'"

An advantage? How? You know how the insurgents can figure out what roads and building are under US surveillance? It's the ones we keep flying drones over! I mean they can see the drones, they can hear the drones, they know what they're doing when the drones fly over them, they know the drones are taking video and pictures, and they should already have a pretty good idea what is in the video and pictures already.

Now if they somehow figured out how to tap into the cameras and have the drones relay video and pictures when they were flying back into base then I would say they've got an advantage, or if they tapped into actual satellite and spy plane footage.

Sure it's a bit stupid they didn't encrypt the actual feed but is the enemy getting any information they didn't know about already?

Comment Re:Then open it up (Score 4, Interesting) 176

I read the first couple of chapters of that Stephen King crapfest. The only idea he had for that was to see how little actual content he could string together in an incoherent jumble and sell as a "Chapter" to get people to pay way more then they would have for an actual book.

The big problem I see with Valve's idea is you would need a community that actually trusts you to deliver on your promise. Pre-Left 4 Dead 2 announcement Valve probably had that kind of community. They don't any more and apparently haven't begun to realize it yet. Valve had a great community that would plunk down money for a promise. Why will that community keep plunking down money when Valve has shown that they'll walk away from their end whenever they think it serves them better?

Besides this idea isn't that far off from what is already happening in the game market. Heck, how many games come out now that aren't really any where close to being a finished product with the idea that if they are successful enough the company might (or might not) bother to fix them? All he's really proposing is that instead of paying to beta test the games like we do way to often now, we start paying at the barely an idea phase. How many times will the community invest in game ideas that go no where before they stop throwing good money after bad?

Another thing, what would stop Valve (or anyone who tried this approach) from taking the money, creating some barely working mishmash of ideas that show some promise, release a barely working version as the "finished product', and then promptly turning around and releasing the a more polished, "completely different", even though it's almost exactly the same game, as a separate property?

The answer? Not a damn thing.

I'm not saying this idea wouldn't work. But it would depend a large part on the level of trust your audience had that you would actually deliver a final product.

Comment Re:What are the lawyers thinking? (Score 1) 793

I imagine you're on to something.

If I'd have been on that jury when they flipped over the harddrive and said "Hey... this thing couldn't be the right one it wasn't even made yet according to the date stamped ont it"

I would have turned to the person sitting next to me in the jury box and said "This person just wasted a week of our lives. I no longer feel sorry for her at all."

(well... ok... I'd have used more colorful language I'm sure)

Slashdot Top Deals

2.4 statute miles of surgical tubing at Yale U. = 1 I.V.League

Working...