Grenade-Style Wireless Camera For Combat 333
nk497 writes "A new wireless camera called the I-Ball is being developed to be shot into locations using a grenade launcher so troops can see what lies ahead. The I-Ball sends real-time, 360-degree video back to soldiers while it's flying through the air and when it lands."
Re:overkill (Score:3, Interesting)
Why not just shoot the grenades in there. Then you'll know what lies ahead (bodies).
Yeah but it might be good to know if those bodies are enemies, civilians or friendlies before you frag them ;)
My million dollar question: What's to stop your opponent from figuring out which frequencies this device transmits on and jamming it and/or targeting it with anti-radiation weapons?
Re:overkill (Score:5, Interesting)
A no-deposit/no-return drone? (Score:5, Interesting)
I sure hope these things are less than $100... hell, less than $10 for that matter. I sure as hell don't think we need to waste that kind of money on stuff the enemy might take home as a souvenir.
"Why can't we all just get along?!" I'd rather see research and development dollars spent making war and conflict obsolete.
At the moment, most of the conflict where it is "the world" vs. the U.S.A., seems to be stemming from ridiculous policies that no one can fully explain. Why do we care about the "spread of communism"? Why do we care about "defending Israel"? There are a lot of humanitarian causes far more dire and we leave those tragedies alone with a clear conscience. Can someone tell me why we spend SO much money and so many human lives on "expanding democracy" and "defending Israel"?
Re:overkill (Score:1, Interesting)
What if it is women and or children with rifles?
same theme, better story: (Score:5, Interesting)
one-eyed san francisco artist looking for the tech that will allow her to put a webcam in her eye socket:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/us_world/2008/11/15/2008-11-15_san_francisco_artist_looks_to_replace_lo.html [nydailynews.com]
Re:Now they really know you're coming... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:A no-deposit/no-return drone? (Score:3, Interesting)
The answer is simple but unpleasant. You try and stop the biggest threats to you. Iraq wasn't using the money it got from oil to make a better life for it's people. It was using it to get nukes and chemical weapons. Yes they really where before the first war. We found lots of nice and nasty stuff then.
Oil = money and money = weapons. The big lesson that most of the western world got from WWII was it is better to fight a little war then a big one.
That is why Nato went into Serbia with the US's help and the UK, US and other nations went into Afghanistan and Iraq. Is that lesson still valid? I don't know.
As too the US vs the world?
You have drank way to much koolaid.
Most of the world sure isn't fighting the US. While the press shakes a finger at the US the actual governments just shake their head in public and behind closed doors are probably glad that it is happening.
Yea you will get some venting on Slashdot about how evil the US is but those people are not in political power.
Re:same theme, better story: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:WTF is a bad guy? (Score:4, Interesting)
Why sit here and worry about terminology?
I'm alarmed by the trend of childish terms being used to discuss grave and complicated situations.
Re:overkill (Score:1, Interesting)
This really is not a bad idea.
The US Military used a similar strategy in Afghanistan where they would radio the enemy and offer them money to surrender!
Apparently it was very successful. Hard cash, even if it's in US dollars, can be very persuasive.
It was actually cheaper for them to pay off the enemy than use their expensive munitions!
Re:WTF is a bad guy? (Score:2, Interesting)
:) You're wrong.
In Iraq, every time we kill innocents, we are fueling anti-American sentiments, effectively perpetuating a cycle of violence by tipping popular and individual sentiments in favor of insurgent groups. Petraeus himself is trying to minimize incidental casualties, and part of this effort is putting more decision power in the hands of lower level soldiers in the field who have the power to recognize targets.
Differentiating between "bad guys" and "good guys" is not only important morally, it is a vital part of our current anti-insurgence strategy.
Please, leave your knee-jerk anti-intellectualism at the door. Petraeus received a Ph.D. studying this stuff, and while he isn't a foot soldier, this kind of intellectual work is vital.
Re:overkill (Score:1, Interesting)
So highlighting the killing of innocent civilians is propaganda. I guess that makes Amnesty International the modern day Goebbels.