If you want a device that allows you to locate, target and kill a subject, you need look no further than DARPA's Super-Resolution Vision System (SRVS), which I looked at recently in the New Scientist technology blog.What I'm wondering is if it will bear the warning:
"RESTRICTED FOR GOVERNMENT OR LAW ENFORCEMENT USE ONLY"[Via Carl S]
2 comments:
i have three contentions.
one, they say nothing about air quality. "... see further than possible through clear air." really? how clear? how about when you're surrounded by smoke, fog, dust? wars aren't fought in clean rooms.
two, most of this stuff never sees the light of day; too much politics involved. lots of stuff fails to be delivered by the time the war's over, if at all. and, a lot of stuff newscientist covers are responses to DARPA's RFPs from crackpots trying to make a buck on those fat tax dollars.
three, our soldiers end up dead when they depend on new technology to solve problems for which the opportunity cost of buying technological superiority just isn't insignificant. the M16 killed far too many dependent on it in vietnam -- it did not come with the correct training. binocs are certainly less critical than the main battle rifle, but that is a separate point. they're still fragile.
my real worry? they make it, find it useless, and start selling surplus to the ATF, to state and local police. they might start to have a tendency to buy it up and show it off, maybe use it, because it's there. stuff you buy starts to try to justify its existence when it sits on the shelf long enough.
say, how much you think it costs to fuel up those tanks they brought to waco?
er, my point on two is: just because someone can dream it up, don't make it so.
and on three, i meant "significant," of course. whups.
Post a Comment