|
What I mean is that the use of force will always ultimately come down to people shooting at each other.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
But isn't that the point of robots? I'll drive my robot around looking for you until I find you and then shoot you. All while in my pjs eating hot pockets. 
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh I see.
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
I think it's because robots are not quite there yet!
But they do use robots already as much as they can. There are drones, gear carrying mules, deminers, probably more I dunno about!!
|
|
|
|
|
if you remove the human cost and suffering from wars you will make them the default action rather than the last resort
You cant outrun the world, but there is no harm in getting a head start
Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time.
|
|
|
|
|
Do you mean US sending robots everywhere to obliterate insurgents who barely have a clean bathroom to take a dump in?
|
|
|
|
|
That'll be useful for all that hand to hand combat you get in modern warfare.
“I believe that there is an equality to all humanity. We all suck.” Bill Hicks
|
|
|
|
|
It reminds me of the Star Trek episode where after millenniums of war, two conflicting countries' war evolved to where battles are entirely done by computer.
Every day a missile would be sent to a random position in your country from the enemy's computers, and your computers would fire one back. Anyone in the kill zones must report to the disintegrators or real missiles will be used after the set time for death has been concluded.
That way, you don't lose any of the culture or precious artifacts you have laying around (as the computers don't require changes to property).
And you can keep your dignity by killing people  , but being civilised about it! Blood splatters are uncivilised!
|
|
|
|
|
Good summary of the episode (A Taste of Armegeddon). Of course the "moral" of the story was that these people had made war so sanitized and logical that they had removed the element of fear from the equation. In a supreme example of violating the non-interference principle Kirk destroys the computer and re-introduces fear by the imminent threat of real missles being used, thus finally resolving the centuries-old war.
Fear... so under-valued.
|
|
|
|
|
Looks pretty cool and it probably won't be long before they have a working prototype.
I hope they don't outsource the communications;
soldier: sh*t is hitting the fan I need help quick
help desk: this is nnnn I am here to assist you, could you give me your ID to confirm your identity?
|
|
|
|
|
I wonder where they are going to shove the micro pile required to power the bloody thing! Bateries ain't that good yet.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
You're just the guy to tell them where to shove it, too!
The difficult we do right away...
...the impossible takes slightly longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Hack the bloody suit with an i-Phone app.
"Dance, soldier, dance!" 
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's open source. They are hoping someone fixes all of its issues for free.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
The only way it could be "fixed" is to have it redone by professionals. It's amazing how silly the governments and politics can be, no matter what the country is. 
"Real men drive manual transmission" - Rajesh.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: It's amazing how silly the governments and politics can be, no matter what the country is. Smile |
Quite true.
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
it was written by professionals.
believe it or not, even professional programmers f*** up sometimes.
|
|
|
|
|
Just because someone does something for a living, does not mean they are good at it.
|
|
|
|
|
and i've never seen a program that worked flawlessly on its initial release.
have you?
|
|
|
|
|
I was talking in a general sense. not developer wise.
To answer your question, no, I don't think I have. But on a project like this is not good enough for it to be working in 1 year. It needs to work now, or atthe very least in a few weeks.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Losinger wrote: have you?
Yes, but it took a couple years to establish the procedures for the plan/develop/test/relese cycle - where the hardest part was to get everybody to understand that there is a world of difference between proper QA and unit-testing.
Unit testing is a good tool that has its place, but QA is much more than just unit testing - and I guess you already know that  .
|
|
|
|
|
Seen this[^]? Something to learn from there...
|
|
|
|
|
Why not? RoR is a pretty popular platform.
|
|
|
|
|
It's popularity is due to fast coding; not high server throughput. For a given load you need a lot more RoR servers than if you were using C#, Java, or PHP. This is why high load sites like Twitter left their initial RoR implementation for PHPScala when they got big.
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
modified 10-Oct-13 15:02pm.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
