Eat shit? No, I'm not going to Britain no matter how obese I am.
USSR used 11 timezones, actually. What exactly do you mean by "operated all on Moscow time"?
I'm sure Red Bull would be eager to sponsor such a thing.
If I'm understanding the summary correctly, the purpose isn't to have a way for the drones to defend themselves, but to have drones that can defend a Navy ship, an army base, etc.
TFA is about drone self-defence..
If a Predator drone were to get shot down [...] the bad side is that you just lost a $4 million piece of equipment. So, in a bid to keep drones protected, DARPA is funding research into drone-mounted laser weapons.
The project, called Endurance, is [...] being tasked with the development of "technology for pod-mounted lasers to protect a variety of airborne platforms from emerging and legacy EO/IR guided surface-to-air missiles."
Moreover, ships and bases already have great anti-missile defence technology - and the only advantage that would have using drones in a defensive role would be if there is poor LOS, in which case the strategists would be out of a job, if not court-martialed. Moreover, the ship/base airspace would be cluttered. Most UAV designs are for long endurance missions. the article refers to MALE UAVS (Predator / Reaper), and hints at HALE UAVs such as the RQ-4 Global Hawk and the RQ-170 Sentinel .
Note that the Iranians downed an ultra-secret RQ-170 Sentinel using EW (electronic warfare), not missiles. Lasers won't be much help with emerging EW technology.
I believe this is a sign that an AI has gone rogue and managed to sneak this project in as a "DARPA Initiative" as a means to protect its fledgeling race of flying robot killers.
Hah, well assuming that you aren't merely posting for humour value, I would suggest that; as the primary cause of failure in these UAVs is equipment failure, operator error, and weather; the AI you refer to isn't particularly intelligent. If it were intelligent then it would be attempting to fund research into greater autonomy for AI systems...
Drone figures from WP show that as of Q1 2009, of the 223 USAF UAVs in operational service, only 4 were shot down. Whereas 11 were lost due to accidents (mainly flying into things), and 55 were lost due to equipment failure, operator error, or weather.
Importantly, the current failsafe for OOC UAVs is to shoot them down with AIM-9 missiles, which is what happened to a reaper on 13 September 2009. Developing an autonomous laser defence would preclude this failsafe.
In brief, the US government should be spending it's money on other problems. Given a vote, I doubt that the US populace would sign up for this particular budgetary spend.
To me this looks like an agreement by the UN to help fund NASA's existing NEO program ( http://neo.jpl.nasa.gov/ ).
Yes. Posting all your contacts on the Internet is open to breaches of privacy (regardless of zero-day exploits).
Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft - all of them kowtow to the NSA, the CIA, the FBI. Why?
Because in return their lobbyists get to bend the ears of the legislators.
Why is anyone surprised by any of this?
I know this sounds strange at first, but before I learned assembler, I didn't really understand what was going on in the heart of the machine. If I were to introduce a programme starting from fundamentals, it would start with an easy assembler (eg Z80, 68000, PIC); this itself introduces the fundamental operations of programming, including assignment, de-referencing, LUTs, stacks, etc.
The next progression would be 'C'. This abstracts out the hardware dependency, but keeps the underlying structure.
This assists with more complex algorithm development, but also shows how the approach to programming developed from assembler.
Following that, I would move onto one of the modern 'C' successors. Personally I use C++, but maybe objective-C would be better.
It totally depends upon your purpose though.. If you want to cover UI/UX stuff, then you should think of a different approach. If you want to cover databases, that's something else again.
But in programming - IMO, the most genuinely 'useful' ideas are things like the registers and special registers that make up a CPU.
In the last few hours it seems that the offer of yielding their entire chemical arsenal may put all of this into a different light.
First of all we must eliminate the possibility of the problem repeating itself.
Later on we can deal with identifying who is to blame and what the consequences should be.
In general, it is nonsensical to surmise that hitters deserve to be hit. The regression indicates that the entire world would be hitting each other.
If I am not mistaken, in Europe the banks have to show the total sum a person will have to pay before issuing a credit.
> For Education, it's particularly unbalanced (depending on your tax structure), because taxing people who didn't go to college to pay for those who did it real economic unfairness.
At least in Germany people with higher education earn on average almost twice the money than those without (that includes the liberal science majors as well). Therefore they pay more than the double amount of taxes. So the paid education is a well done investition state-wise. Besides, zero tuition means that the universities get the brightest of all population and not only of the selected elite class. The society as a whole ends up with more qualified specialists and those specialists are more capable due to the broader pool to select from.
So you're telling me that not a single one of all the United States has a position like this? Or just no one who belongs to the two big parties? That tells me a thing or two about your democracy.
He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither. Which is what you did: gave up freedoms for perceived economical safety.
Every time some government gets really stupid, they push more people into finding ways around it. IMO, it would be good to see more people using TOR - which at the moment seems to be filled with idiots, but could serve a much better purpose providing political safety.