|
feedmegin posted:I'm sure such activities would greatly deter the First Guards Tank Division on its three week long blitzkrieg to La Rochelle and Brest, yes. Especially that latter is supposed to be evidence of America helping the people fighting the Nazis? (Not to mention rather over-egging the pudding, London is not a financial backwater today let alone in 1945). Well...that's not at all what I was saying.  The intended effect would be that a reader would start by thinking about the US' delayed entry into the world wars, then advance to the quick entry into Korea under a UN banner, followed by Vietnam for ~reasons~, followed by increasingly questionable and preemptive military action culminating in questionably justifiable US involvement in Iraq this century, Syria, Yemen, various African locations would suggest that the US is more than willing to jump in without a loving thought. I said "in the past 100 years" not "100 years ago." We're getting more and more antsy to put boots on the ground, probably because it's at the heart of the modern US production economy. France didn't want to team up because France didn't want anyone telling it what to do re: colonialism, and because it needed to forge a strong new national identity. The previous few hadn't turned out so great.
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 18:55
|
|
It's not exactly surprising that France in particular decided it wasn't going to put all its trust in America to do the right thing immediately the third time around.
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 14:00 |
|
|
Godholio posted:ACC doesn't drop bombs. Pretty sure their units drop a shitload of bombs, but they typically drop them on training ranges. But in all seriousness, the Numbered Air Forces (and plenty of other non-AF services) get wonky when they simultaneously belong to a combatant command and forces like ACC or FORSCOM.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 19:10
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:It would be cheap and easy to make a face-seeking drone with all the algorithms developed for taking vacation pictures that get low-power dumb hardware with an imaging sensor to focus on human faces. Facial recognition tech is dangerously unreliable and basically only works properly on white folks. We can't even identify members of our own population with it, let alone unknown insurgents who are probably masked up in some way. https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/19/tech/facial-recognition-study-racial-bias/index.html It wouldn't be cheap or easy to fix these problems, and the drone wouldn't be able to do the processing locally. You would need enough bandwidth, in the field, in battle, for the drone to upload pictures and get targeting direction. None of that stuff is done locally on your phone; it's post-processed in The Cloud (which is just someone else's computer). As for targeting enemy uniforms, yeah... insurgents sure do love wearing uniforms and not whatever tactical-looking thing they have ready to hand! Plus I'm sure the enemy will never think of wearing our uniforms and insignia! Only dastardly evildoers would think of such a thing. And if you let drones have too much autonomy, well, it's a short flight from there to the drat thing going Skynet all over your own troops.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 19:18
|
|
|
At this point, it's just discussing bombs that will hit the wedding cake and not just anywhere near the wedding.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 19:24
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Pretty sure their units drop a shitload of bombs, but they typically drop them on training ranges. NAFs are dumb as hell, and I'm convinced they exist primarily as a "justification" for a couple dozen GO billets. OPCON/TACON considerations do get awkward sometimes and it sucks to actually teach to new personnel. Godholio fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Feb 8, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 19:30
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/josephhdempsey/status/1358768480271691777?s=21 Pretty good answer.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 19:38
|
|
|
Kesper North posted:Facial recognition tech is dangerously unreliable and basically only works properly on white folks. We can't even identify members of our own population with it, let alone unknown insurgents who are probably masked up in some way. I'm not talking about algorithms that are designed to recognize specific faces. The ones that take a picture and return the group of pixels that are most likely to represent a human face are well-tested and work pretty well on people with a variety of skin tones and facial features. This is enough to make a good camera autofocus, or, if you really wanted to, a human-face-seeking missile or drone. The necessary hardware and software are surprisingly simple and the whole thing can be done 100% locally for a couple of dollars (plus the cost of your optics and imaging sensor, which can range from another couple bucks to $gorgonstare). If you want, you can play with this yourself. If you set your phone to airplane mode and open up a camera app that shows you what's going on with face detection, it'll still put the little targeting square over your face. No cloud services required. Algorithms that actually identify specific people are much more complex, require a lot more computing power, and are much more biased. That's what your article is talking about. PS: "the cloud is just someone else's computer" is a dumb oversimplification that's only useful for talking to executives that think it's somehow magic. It can be anything from a combined license for somebody else's proprietary software along with the right to run it on their computers, to a resource pool of computing hardware you own that's easy to reallocate to different uses (which is how it would be used on anything approaching a battlefield situation if it's ever used at all). But this isn't the coldware thread so I'll stop there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 19:51
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:Algorithms that actually identify specific people are much more complex, require a lot more computing power, and are much more biased. That's what your article is talking about. My lab put up recognition cameras (not just image but gait and posture and more) to control access to some doors to avoid the backup that happens when everyone needs to badge and pin through. They were turned off almost immediately because the number of false returns made it unusable. The tech is not ready for prime time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 20:27
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:The ones that take a picture and return the group of pixels that are most likely to represent a human face are well-tested and work pretty well on people with a variety of skin tones and facial features. This is enough to make a good camera autofocus, or, if you really wanted to, a human-face-seeking missile or drone. The necessary hardware and software are surprisingly simple and the whole thing can be done 100% locally for a couple of dollars (plus the cost of your optics and imaging sensor, which can range from another couple bucks to $gorgonstare). Seems like an unnecessary step, only there to spice up your warcrime life.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 20:44
|
|
|
Chewbacca Defense posted:I guess we could strap some HE on it. Couldn't you have a drone that targets someone's face? Isn't this just the sensor fuzed munition but recalibrated for people instead of vehicles? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5wMuTdfaEzA
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 23:17
|
|
|
Godholio posted:ACC doesn't drop bombs. Space Gopher posted:I'm not talking about algorithms that are designed to recognize specific faces. quote:PS: "the cloud is just someone else's computer" is a dumb oversimplification that's only useful for talking to executives that think it's somehow magic. It can be anything from a combined license for somebody else's proprietary software along with the right to run it on their computers, to a resource pool of computing hardware you own that's easy to reallocate to different uses (which is how it would be used on anything approaching a battlefield situation if it's ever used at all). But this isn't the coldware thread so I'll stop there.
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 23:18
|
|
|
Don't worry, they'll build Starlink terminals into them 
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 23:38
|
|
|
Kesper North posted:Facial recognition tech is dangerously unreliable and basically only works properly on white folks
|
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 23:46
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:I'm not talking about algorithms that are designed to recognize specific faces. Uh..... huh. What is the point of that exactly? And what capability does this get us that we don't already have? quote:Algorithms that actually identify specific people are much more complex, require a lot more computing power, and are much more biased. That's what your article is talking about. I assumed you envisioned this notional weapons system with the capability to identify and target specific individuals because otherwise I can't see what the point of it would be as compared to literally any other cheaper and more reliable system. quote:PS: "the cloud is just someone else's computer" is a dumb oversimplification that's only useful for talking to executives that think it's somehow magic. It can be anything from a combined license for somebody else's proprietary software along with the right to run it on their computers, to a resource pool of computing hardware you own that's easy to reallocate to different uses (which is how it would be used on anything approaching a battlefield situation if it's ever used at all). But this isn't the coldware thread so I'll stop there. What happens if they drone can't contact said hardware because of ECM? Or because it has been destroyed? Or there's a steel water tower in the way? Can your cheap off the shelf phone hardware sustain the accelerations required by its platform? Can it withstand shocks, impacts, weapons fire? How good is the optic? Is it susceptible to fogging in certain conditions? I'm sorry, maybe I'm still dumbly oversimplifying things. evil_bunnY posted:Go ooooon Oooookay: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/facial-recognition-systems-racism-protests-police-bias/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/tech...-expanding-use/ http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2020/racial-discrimination-in-face-recognition-technology/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-nist-tested-facial-recognition-algorithms-for-racial-bias/ https://www.aclu.org/news/privacy-technology/how-is-face-recognition-surveillance-technology-racist/ Kesper North fucked around with this message at 23:52 on Feb 8, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 8, 2021 23:48
|
|
|
The best representation of this was that episode of Better off Ted
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 00:24
|
|
|
priznat posted:The best representation of this was that episode of Better off Ted https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jqG1fX3ZaLQ
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 00:51
|
|
|
Some of y'all are very much missing the enormous body of context because buzzwords like "drones" and "neural networks" are artificially narrowing the scope way too much. Instead, think of this in terms of denial and deception, which has existed for as long as war has. With the advent of modern ISR - and by that I mean as soon as someone carried a camera on a plane - adversaries have always attempted to alter their signatures such that targets would not be recognized. Originally the recognizer was the Mk. 1 eyeball, but a computer is not fundamentally different. It looks for patterns that match patterns typically generated by targets. If the pattern is "looks like a tank", adversaries can pile a bunch of branches on top to look like a bush. They can paint a rock so that the rock looks like a tank. They can do all kinds of infinitely more sophisticated things, and they do. They're doing this to try to fool present-day ISR systems that are themselves vastly more sophisticated than a quadcopter with a webcam. The advent of drones has not notably affected the progress of this arms race. The advent of computers has, although it's much more about the volume and speed of processing rather than its accuracy. Personally, I would expect the COTS-manhack to be defeated by an inflatable sex doll. I am certain it would be defeated by a ghillie suit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 01:25
|
|
|
Where drones are mainly interesting is the potential to give non-state actors and failed states greatly improved situational awareness, and some access to weakly missile-like capabilities in permissive environments.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 01:47
|
|
|
Captain von Trapp posted:Personally, I would expect the COTS-manhack to be defeated by an inflatable sex doll. I am certain it would be defeated by a ghillie suit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 01:50
|
|
|
Kesper North posted:Uh..... huh. What is the point of that exactly? And what capability does this get us that we don't already have? Chewbacca Defense was the one who asked whether it's possible to build a drone that finds the nearest human face and flies at it (presumably with an explosive/gun/prison shank/rock or something attached, in order to hurt the face's owner). The answer is "yes, absolutely, and it's not even that hard with modern computing technology." We're talking about something on the level of a psychopathic computer engineering student's undergrad capstone project here. Hobbyists have built similar hardware to do less harmful things, like shoot a nerf dart at people. I also already pointed out that it's a terrible weapon, because it is almost impossible to take it from "see something that looks like a face, kill face" to useful target discrimination, and it'd be trivial to neutralize it with countermeasures like "if you're outdoors, wear a face covering" and "put pictures of faces on solid, face-seeking-drone proof objects, rendering them useless." I think you're angrily agreeing with me on those points. "The cloud is just somebody else's computer" remains a dumb oversimplification that's only slightly better than "the cloud will enable all our Enterprise-Wide Computing Technology with zero cost, effort, or scaling pains." ECM, steel water towers, cheap off the shelf phone hardware, the impact resistance of that hardware, optical quality, and fogging have nothing to do with that statement being a glib slogan instead of a useful insight (while I will admit that fogging does have some relationship to clouds, it's not the one you're talking about). And, face detection (as opposed to facial recognition) is easily handled on simple, low-power hardware without any help from server-side processing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 01:56
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:It seems to work very well with Japanese and less well with Romance languages. I feel like it usually works better with more formal/technical documents but starts to break down with conversational writing, regardless of language.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 04:23
|
|
|
Space Gopher posted:Chewbacca Defense was the one who asked whether it's possible to build a drone that finds the nearest human face and flies at it (presumably with an explosive/gun/prison shank/rock or something attached, in order to hurt the face's owner). The answer is "yes, absolutely, and it's not even that hard with modern computing technology." We're talking about something on the level of a psychopathic computer engineering student's undergrad capstone project here. Hobbyists have built similar hardware to do less harmful things, like shoot a nerf dart at people. I appear to have misidentified my target, then, but I'm not sure why your jimmies are so rustled about : quote:"The cloud is just somebody else's computer" remains a dumb oversimplification that's only slightly better than "the cloud will enable all our Enterprise-Wide Computing Technology with zero cost, effort, or scaling pains." ECM, steel water towers, cheap off the shelf phone hardware, the impact resistance of that hardware, optical quality, and fogging have nothing to do with that statement being a glib slogan instead of a useful insight (while I will admit that fogging does have some relationship to clouds, it's not the one you're talking about). And, face detection (as opposed to facial recognition) is easily handled on simple, low-power hardware without any help from server-side processing. I was being flippant while hinting at the fact that risks inherent in any weapons system multiply the instant you delegate targeting to an algorithm, and doing offboard postprocessing would multiply this risk. Are glib slogans not allowed when posting on a serious internet comedy forum? Is there any reason why the cheap, off-the-shelf glib slogans shouldn't be deployed, instead of the bespoke product of a cost-plus meme contract? I was having a great deal of trouble taking this conversation seriously, which should not be surprising to you given that, as you say, we are in violent agreement about the hypothetical weapon's ridiculousness.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 05:20
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Go ooooon Two most common forms of human detection / facial recognition for people with dark skin: -Doesn’t look like anything to me meme -They’re the same picture meme
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 05:42
|
|
|
Air Force takes a commanding lead in the anail-paced race to acknowledge women and different types if hair. https://twitter.com/lincolnmilitary/status/1357857795404689412?s=21 Meanwhile, most of the Army’s “new” standards are just a return to what was allowed back in 2014.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 05:54
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Two most common forms of human detection / facial recognition for people with dark skin: Kesper North posted:Oooookay:
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 12:54
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Sorry I was jesting because I adore the implication of a smart munitions only ever being able of fragging YT's. Well, also ethnic minorities in China. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/16/technology/alibaba-china-facial-recognition-uighurs.html https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-55634388 And let's not forget about HickVision! https://www.npr.org/2019/10/08/768150426/u-s-blacklists-chinese-tech-firms-over-treatment-of-uighurs Warbadger fucked around with this message at 14:55 on Feb 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 13:44
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Air Force takes a commanding lead in the anail-paced race to acknowledge women and different types if hair. What were the changes? Just my recollection from performing inspections as an NCO in the Marines 25 years ago was that shoulder length hair (I think as long as it was braided above the collar was okay also?) light make up and nail polish that were approximately flesh tones or were muted were okay while in uniform.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 16:10
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:I'm sure such activities would greatly deter the First Guards Tank Division on its three week long blitzkrieg to La Rochelle and Brest, yes. Especially that latter is supposed to be evidence of America helping the people fighting the Nazis? (Not to mention rather over-egging the pudding, London is not a financial backwater today let alone in 1945). You do know the US Army had about 250,000 troops in West Germany, right? I doubt that they were going to sit back and help direct traffic while the Soviets made their way to France.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 16:55
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:Well, also ethnic minorities in China. It's not just Hikvision, but Dahua doing it as well. https://ipvm.com/reports/dahua-uyghur-warning Huawei is writing a lot of analytics for this as well. It's been two years but I've seen Hikvision's "racial detection" analytics demoed in a decent size public setting. They weren't even remotely in the ballpark. But I doubt that will stop Chinese police from using as an excuse to be assholes. China is pouring a piss ton of money into anti-Uyghur stuff. It looks like any company that can get near China's Safe Cities program is going whole hog on this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 17:14
|
|
|
Thomamelas posted:It's not just Hikvision, but Dahua doing it as well. I singled that one out specifically because of the name. Use Hick Vision to pick out minorities in a crowd! There's a ton of vendors selling minority-identification software to the CCP right now in support of their ongoing genocide and possibly some upcoming ones.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 17:59
|
|
|
Cessna posted:You do know the US Army had about 250,000 troops in West Germany, right? I doubt that they were going to sit back and help direct traffic while the Soviets made their way to France. I agree, actually, I just don't think that citing America's actions in the century before that reinforce that point in any way whatsoever. The Cold War is kind of the polar opposite of previous American isolationism, even. feedmegin fucked around with this message at 22:51 on Feb 9, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2021 22:48
|
|
|
Murgos posted:What were the changes? Just my recollection from performing inspections as an NCO in the Marines 25 years ago was that shoulder length hair (I think as long as it was braided above the collar was okay also?) light make up and nail polish that were approximately flesh tones or were muted were okay while in uniform.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 00:03
|
|
|
I found something While this comes from EnglishRussia.com and was probably *not* an actual project beyond an engineering doodle, I give you: ekranoplan aircraft carrier! With swing wings, no less. Imagine 8 GE 90s driving the thing.     
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 02:43
|
|
|
I’m the AWACS rotodome mounted on something with a service ceiling below the vertical stab height of an E-3.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 02:56
|
|
|
I know it's only a sketch because if it had gotten to the actual design stage, they'd have had to build it. It is its own reason for being.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 03:02
|
|
|
I'm the F-14 surfaces.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 03:02
|
|
|
'tis a fine kitbash, English, but to be sure 'tis no engineering concept
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 03:09
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I found something Please stop spoiling Ace Combat 8's final boss.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 03:16
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I found something it's from a charles stross book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missile_Gap
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 03:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 14:00 |
|
|
I’m extremely curious how you launch planes at like 200 knots or whatever that thing would do. Do they take off into the wind? Do they even travel forward at that point or just like straight up and possibly backwards? I understand the correct answer is probably “poorly” but I’m struggling to even picture how that would work. Mazz fucked around with this message at 06:16 on Feb 10, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2021 06:14
|
|
