Do you develop on GitHub? You can keep using GitHub but automatically sync your GitHub releases to SourceForge quickly and easily with this tool so your projects have a backup location, and get your project in front of SourceForge's nearly 20 million monthly users. It takes less than a minute. Get new users downloading your project releases today!
Posted
by
Hemos
from the battle-of-the-video dept.
rask22 writes "FiringSquad has a interesting new article up discussing the changes at Quantum3D since the demise of 3dfx along with the current military applications of NVidia chipsets. Interesting to see how the US Gov is using all this technology coming out of the gaming sector."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
A year ago, we wrote an article about NVIDIA detailing its ?Adventures in 3D.? We started with the early NV1, waded through the tumultuous NV2, and finished with the account of the GeForce 2. Since then, FiringSquad has added the story of the GeForce 3 and GeForce 4, but there is still an element missing from the narrative. Throughout these articles, we?ve only talked about at NVIDIA chips as consumer or computing products used for gaming or professional digital art creation. 3D graphics technology such as hardware T&L, anti-aliasing, and texture filtering were just toys for our imagination and hearts.
Toys for the Pentagon
While we have enjoyed our 3D graphics technology for entertainment over the last few years, NVIDIA and its partner Quantum3D have also been developing embedded graphics technology in the same way ELSA has been producing workstation products. Embedded graphics technology has many applications, including industrial and medical imaging, but perhaps one of the most interesting products are those being developed for the United States? Department of Defense. We?re not talking about the use of NVIDIA GPUs to run team-building games such as Rogue Spear, but the use of actual NVIDIA/Quantum3D hardware in the field that helps our armed forces ?place steel on target? effectively. This partnership is called FARSIGHT nV and the first design win is a Quadro2 Go in the cockpit display of the F-22 Raptor air dominance fighter.
My first reaction was one of excitement on so many different levels? can you possibly imagine what the overclocking potential would be on a mil-spec Quadro2 Go? As my mind wandered towards Top Gun, my enthusiasm turned to skepticism. Sure, NVIDIA GPUs are fast, but was that 3D power actually necessary in a fighter jet? The targeting crosshairs in Top Gun didn?t seem too complex, and with cockpit LCDs being maybe 5 or 8 inches, wouldn?t the resolution be so low that fillrate wouldn?t matter?
When I had the opportunity to talk with the team from Quantum3D my very first question was how hot a mil-spec NVIDIA GPUs ran. They told me it wasn?t a mil-spec chip. Now my excitement and skepticism turned to curiosity.
Consumer-Off-The-Shelf Technology
Why weren?t ?mil-spec? GPUs used for the F-22? That was the very point. Traditionally, the computers that powered aerospace components such as cockpit displays relied on expensive custom graphics technology. When a new fighter jet or vehicle was designed, it wasn?t uncommon for $100 million to be spent on the research and development for a graphics chip created from scratch. In addition to the development costs, the cost to manufacture was also very high due to the small quantities. This may have made sense in the 80?s when consumer PCs were just in their infancy, but this gap continued narrow with time. In 1999, the Department of Defense decided that it was time to change the way graphics chips were being used in armored vehicles and aircraft. Why spend so much money developing your own chip, when you can take advantage of the huge budgets from companies such as 3dfx and NVIDIA, and economies of scale from mass production? Even after making the necessary modifications for military use, the savings would still be more than an order of magnitude per chip.
Enter Quantum3D
Quantum3D, a 3dfx spin off, had a wealth of experience with military virtual reality simulators that also gave them the business contacts they needed to expand into embedded graphics. It wasn?t a surprise that avionics companies such as Kaiser Electronics and Honeywell turned to 3dfx and Quantum3D for solutions. Indeed, while FiringSquad was giving first hand impressions of Voodoo 5 anti-aliasing in Quake3, VSA-100 graphics chips were being incorporated into the AH-64D Apache Longbow to provide pilots with high-resolution color displays of navigation maps, enact weapons guidance and perform other aircraft management functions. The VSA-100 would later earn a spot in the F-18 Super Hornet. These design wins validated the ability of taking modified consumer of the shelf hardware for military use.
On December 15, 2000 NVIDIA announced that it would purchase 3dfx. For a moment, the future looked uncertain. Quantum3D had just begun to build its reputation in the embedded graphics market, but now their graphics chip supplier would disappear. The military had obtained cost savings in the short term by going with consumer technology, but it was clear that gaming-orientated companies were more susceptible to the vagaries of the market. Fortunately, NVIDIA agreed to support Quantum3D?s legacy VSA-100 products as needed, and both companies made plans to mutually explore ways to bring NVIDIA?s technology and Quantum3D?s experience together.
In late 2001, this relationship between the two companies was officially dubbed FARSIGHT nV with the first announced design win being a Quadro2 Go powered Multi-Function Display in the F-22 Raptor. In 2002, Quantum3D now has products that can be used to retrofit the embedded training systems in the M1A1 Abrams tank, Bradley Armored Personnel Carrier, products that are currently being evaluated for use on the Crusader Howitzer and Bradley A3 programs, Quadro4 Go based solutions, and design wins on the Stryker Interim Armored Vehicle and Land Warrior Virtual Training System.
Embedded Training vs. Real-Time Information
When talking about 3D graphics out in the field, there are essentially two different categories for use, embedded training and real-time information.
Embedded Training
Embedded training platforms are the easiest to imagine. They?re almost like regular PC gaming machines, except they?re ruggedized for use in armored vehicles or wearable computers. They may even be running a Windows OS. Embedded training platforms are designed to help soldiers rehearse their mission and improve their skills while on the field. They can review the mission by looking at maps, images, or do precision gunnery and unit-level tactical training exercises while on the field. This may not seem particularly exciting, but you can never discount extra hours on a simulator, as practice makes perfect.
Real Time
Real-time information displays are more exotic. Here, 3D graphics can be used to provide standard radar and armament information to the pilot as well as ?synthetic vision? that improves safety in zero visibility conditions and a general improvement in situational awareness, reducing the risk of friendly fire casualties. Certainly, anyone who has seen Macross or any other sci-fi anime can imagine where this technology may lead to years from now. Since these are mission critical components, Windows is clearly not the operating system in use. Quantum3D has developed custom drivers for a number of real-time operating systems such as VXWorks.
Still, the question you probably have is what 3D features are actually being used in the cockpit. Is a Quadro2 Go overkill? What quality features are used? As you can imagine, line anti-aliasing is a very important feature for these AMLCD displays. What really surprised me is how much fillrate these cockpit displays require. The military has 5? AMLCD panels which run at 1280x1024, and on the horizon are 8? panels with 1920x1440 native resolutions!
Conclusion
So there you go. The next time you play Counter-Strike, you can tell yourself that the research that went into the anti-aliasing you?re using and into achieving the fill rate necessary for flawless framerates when smoke grenades are being thrown about is also being used in fighter jets and tanks. What?s next? Well, if I told you, I?d have to kill you.
Ok, I've taken this the wrong way. I thought they were using the chips for _simulation_ - hence the need for extreme high end performance. Thanks for the correction.
to visit exciting places, meet interesting people, and kill them.
so you mean that all this time i've been developing my hand/eye coordination i've been testing technologies that are now used in the military?
Yup.
Imagine yourself for a moment wearing a brass hat. You've got a stream of young civilians coming in to begin their military service. Your goal is to train those young people so that they:
Defeat the enemy,
Remain as safe as possible, and
Come back home
The US military folks have realized since before the Gulf War that young people are entering the military having spent hundreds or thousands of hours developing gaming skills.
This is potentially free training -- there's no way the military could possibly pay to train that many hours or train to that level of skill. And study after study has shown that gaming skills transfer over to combat situations, and that transfer of training is even more dramatic when combat displays and actions can be adapted to be more like their videogame counterparts.
What's more, military training is inherently dangerous, while videogaming seldom results in anything worse than a blister on your thumb.
Anybody who's thinking Ender's Game may be forgiven -- though Card had to spend an enormous amount of plot time developing a military and political situation where allowing Ender and friends to do their thing wasn't wildly improbable.
So keep on pushing them buttons. If you decide to help your country in warfare against its enemies, the skills you develop will raise your chances of coming back home.
This is potentially free training -- there's no way the military could possibly pay to train that many hours or train to that level of skill. And study after study has shown that gaming skills transfer over to combat situations, and that transfer of training is even more dramatic when combat displays and actions can be adapted to be more like their videogame counterparts.
That said, however, the money saved in training is offset by additional money spent in DE-training so as to stop the GI's from attempting to rocket jump up to the second floor of the barracks.
Most of the computer and console games played today require one of the following three skill sets (often there is overlap):
Attack, dodge and maneuver.
Navigate and maneuver.
Strategize, direct (or engage) and react.
It also happens that these are the skill sets employed by soldiers in modern battles. The biggest difference between the real battlefield and a game is that the battlefield traditionally has required strength, endurance and discipline. The modern battlefield also requires a level of coodinated communication not yet matched in computer gaming.
Even further off topic: It is interesting that the we as a human species have survived and prospered by devloping and exploiting complex hunting skills and strategies. Most of the pre-history of the species was a 75,000 year territorial expansion over the over the surface of the dry earth. Humans did not develop agricultural resources until the climate and our populations stabilized enough to make farming an "obvious" alternative to hunting. Therefore we are the descendants of the last, most successful terrestrial hunters (note: we are not necessarily the most successful terrestrial hunters of all time because we just don't know). Our games frequently mimic hunting activities and our wars are the natural results of our competitive nature and our aptitude to kill. All predatory social species will develop conflicts between individuals AND groups.
It is easy to see that our games and our predatory activity and our conflicts will probably always be very similar. The other conclusion available from these details is that we are not really predisposed to live peaceful, stress-free lives. In fact, the pressure to live in an ordered, peaceful, structured society is fairly contrary to our natural tendencies. Perhaps this is one reason why societies tend to decay? It seems to me pretty comical that we have achieved total superiority over the other species on the planet and now we have turned our domination and predation against ourselves. Do the animals that were once our prey now quietly giggle among themselves when they see us kill eachother instead of them? Now we are consigned to struggle against our own nature and against our own wills to make peace. It seems almost an abomination to smother our greatest virtues. If we must make peace then I suppose we can use our skill to play games. In that light the playing of games is an extordinary savior of civilization. Our tendencies can be subverted. Civility can be maintained. Is this the noble role of the video game? Time will tell.
I hope the military remembers to disable quicksave/load on all these games... it wouldn't do to confuse a hoard of fresh recruits into thinking that the military had invented some sort of real-life undo button! Games are a lot harder when you have to go through the entire thing without being hit...
The military, even the US military, has a limited R&D budget. Why go to the trouble of developing a chipset from scratch, when you can just use one that's already been developed? I can guarantee that the amount of money spent on commercial research and development in the area of graphics far exceeds that of any military research into the same area.
Really, this is no different than the US military using Intel or AMD CPUs in their computer systems - there's no doubt that these consumer-driven products give them more than enough bang for their buck. Why spend $100 million on a new CPU when you can buy one for $99 at CompuSmart? It's not "surprising". Its good business.
The military - including agencies like DARPA, ONNR, etc - don't just choose products based on cost. This is a common misconception. One of the reasons gov't funded projects are so expensive is that they *TRY* to push the envelope. Think about it - Do you want your military to use the same quality components as your enemy? Or do you want them to use bleeding-edge (but very carefully verified) technology?
Don't believe me? We saw the same thing when NASA chose to fund Boeing's overbudget, delayed, and far-fetched next-gen reusable spacecraft, rather than selecting the already built and working prototype model by McDD. NASAs justification? The Boeing craft required alot of new technology to be developed.
The same thing is true in university research, btw.
offerors should emphasize
radical concepts that may contain high technical risk but
if enabled would have commensurate high military payoff.
These are typical words for a DARPA solicitation. The last thing DARPA wants to hear about is something you're pretty sure will work.
The problem space for this one is fairly prosaic in comparison to some recent ones (nanotech, weird biology, real AI), but the problems addressed (being absolutely sure you can communicate in a hostile and confusing environment, fighting on any randomly chosen battlefield like it's your home field, and weapons that will kill the bad guys but not the good guys) are first class Hard Problems.
Notice also that the amount of money they've got to spend on all three projects in this area is US$5M. Chicken feed. Shrinking budgets and a proper insistence that defense dollars show up on the battlefield preclude much else.
Same ideas Boeing and everyone else, use the military to give state funded R&D which can be reused for the next generation of civillian components. The joke is that given the length of time it takes to get staff through the Pentagon, the civillians will probably have it first and cheaper.
Remember during the Gulf war, the US ended up buying civillian receivers and thus having to disable Selective Availability.
Yup.
A few years ago when the Hubble telescope was upgraded, the swapped the processor with an Intel 486 processor that had been retrofitted with shielding stuff, etc. I don't see why they should bother developing something when there's already a ready product on the market that works fine.
I think people would also be happier that their tax dollars are being spent on developing stuff that really needs developing, like new missles, weapons, rather than equipment that can already be bought off the shelf. Furthermore, I believe no amount of testing the military does can exceed the amount of testing that a graphics chip is subject to, when released to the millions of gamers in the consumer market.
Why go to the trouble of developing a chipset from scratch, when you can just use one that's already been developed?
Because....many of those (not all) commercial off-the shelf (COTS) items don't live up to MIL-spec. While you might not run Quake3 in:
sub-zero temperatures (-50F)
desert temperatures (130F)
low/no/exo atmospheric conditions
a Nuclear Environment (OPINE)
chemical/biological agent environment
the middle of an electro-magnetic pulse (EMP)
Chances are, the military equipment will.
And don't forget the fact that such equipment is typically designed to go into some kind of vessel, so you need to take into account:
energy consumption
thermal dissapation
physical area
When designing electronics for planes, ships, vehicles, etc. the ultimate goal is to provide a maximum GFLOP per watt per square inch
That's why the DoD spends so much money on some of these things...
I wonder how much interest they've shown in newer games like Rogue Spear or CounterStrike. Though I wonder how much cheaper/more effective a good paintball game would be for this type of training.
Well, actually as far as I know, police departments already use airsoft games to simulate training, as a more cost-effective and realistic alternative to paintball or computer games.
For those who don't know what airsoft is, its a team based game very similar to paintball, except it focuses more on simulation, so players dress up in military fatigues, and the weapons are typically 1:1 scale replicas of real life weapons, like MP5s, M16s, etc, etc.
I almost wanted to post wanted to post a url to an airsoft website to let the slashdot effect screw them but decided against it:) try using google.
In the Singapore military though, computer simulations are used to train pilots, armour divisions, etc, but for army, they use laser devices attached to their rifles, which shoot lasers when blanks are fired through it, and you have to wear a vest with sensors on them.
In conclusion, I can see how computer simulations would serve as an effective and realistic form of training for pilots or drivers, but this doesn't hold true for foot soldiers. Humping a 50kg of equipment over a few miles and still having to have the energy and concentration required to engage in a firefight just isn't the same as holding your finger on the W button on your keyboard for half an hour and clicking your mouse button.
And the line between fantasy and reality blurs even further. People around this site like to say "Well it's just a game" when asked about their debilitating Quake addictions.
Yet the strongest military in the free world is using the same "game" as training material. Before that it was Doom, and before that, Battlezone. How many hours have you spent molding yourself into a ruthless killer?
When are we going to wise up and see Washington doing something about this. If they are using it to train soldiers, we shouldn't be allowing kids (or maybe even adults) anywhere near it.
I know it sounds ridiculous, but I might feel a little bit safer if we had something like background checks to prevent all those creepy, friendless joners from buying gruesomely violent games (Think Soldier of Fortune) I might sleep a little better.
That's a pretty bold statement. Do you have actual, scientific evidence to back this up?
Are you saying that the increased displays of violence in the media (computer games, news shows, movies, etc) DOES NOT make people more suseptable and accepting of violence in real life?
Clearly we can't place ALL the blame on violent video games, but you can't completely ignore their impact either.
DId you know they have tapes is REAL, ACTUAL combat they show to soldiers to train them? Ban all VCRs and TVs!
Now YOUR the one making a jump in logic. At no point did the previous poster say "Let's ban computers because of the violent video games" as you suggest. He clearly suggested that we, as citizens, need to question the impact of these games on our society.
Or did the Erfurt shootings NOT just happen in your little universe?
Or did the Erfurt shootings NOT just happen in your little universe?
Given what I've heard about Korean players (especially regarding Starcraft), there should be at least a couple school shootings over there every week. Or maybe video game violence isn't the main cause...
The Singapore police actually created a special department to deal specifically with RL crimes inspired by net stuff. There's some MMORPG there where the company running it had to hire special paramilitary security, because there were so many attempted breakins. Now, this has nothing to do with the idea that video violence desensitizes (It can, in the right circumstances, but normal game playing is not indoctrination), but it does say something about how caught up in games people can get.
When people started making custom terrain for Doom, some one I knew made a Doom model of several parts of the university he was at. After having tried it for only about 20 minutes, and then visiting the location in the model, it really increased awareness about the floor plans in regards to short cuts, avenues of approach, bottlenecks and ambuse positions. The same went for the others that tried it it.
<bs rate="+3">In regards to military applications for "first person shooters", it is a good occasional compliment to regular training, especially in urban areas. The alternative is closing down the building and running around, but carefully, so as not to break or scratch the walls or furniture, in a small part of the building + lot. Running field exercises is slow, expensive, and disruptive. In a simulation it's just fine to break windows and doors as needed and you have the entire building to work with.</bs>
As far as civilian applications go, I'd think that the travel industry would really keen on this. With such simulated environments, travel could really be more comfortable and more efficient by experiencing a simulation of your route in advance. The second time you have to find your way around an airport, trainstation, or city center is always much easier and faster compared to the first time.
I don't put any faith into the "military conspiracy" you imply, but you raise a good point: Realistic first person shooter games serve the same purpose as the standard military shooting range: they desensitize the shooter to the idea of firing at a human shape. Apparently something like 75% of all soldiers in World War I couldn't bring themselves to fire at other human beings - this is a result of our biological imperative to propogate and continue the species. However, with the introduction of the "human shaped pop-up" target range for basic training, that number dropped to a few percent by Vietnam. I'd venture to say that within the next few years, the military will actually be using first person shooters to desensitize the soldiers instead of wasting ammunition on the firing range.
Please see Men Against Fire (1946, 1978), by Brig. Gen. S. L. A. Marshall, which I have open right in front of me. Based on his post-combat interviews, Marshall concluded in his book Men Against Fire (1946, 1978) that only 15 to 20 percent of the individual riflemen in World War II fired their own weapons at an exposed enemy soldier. In 1946, the US Army had accepted Marshall's conclusions, and the Human Resources Research Office of the US Army subsequently pioneered a revolution in combat training, which eventually replaced firing at targets with deeply ingrained conditioning, using realistic, man-shaped pop-up targets that fall when hit. Psychologists assert that this kind of powerful operant conditioning is the only technique that will reliably influence the primitive, midbrain processing of a frightened human being. This application and perfection of basic conditioning techniques increased the rate of fire to approximately 55 percent in Korea and around 95 percent in Vietnam (Grossman, 1995).
Equally high rates of fire resulting from modern conditioning techniques can be seen in Richard Holmes' (Soldiers, 1985) observation of British firing rates in the Falklands and FBI data on law enforcement firing rates since the nationwide introduction of modern conditioning techniques in the late 1960s.
For additional info and further statistics please consider the following selections:
Konrad Lorenz, On Aggression, 1963 John Keegan, The Face of Battle, 1976 Jim Goodwin, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorders: A Handbook for Clinicians, 1988 Dave Grossman, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society, 8th ed., 1996
... only 15 to 20 percent of the individual riflemen in World War II fired their own weapons at an exposed enemy soldier...
Great looking references, but I have to ask if the 15-20% represents infantryman in general or those presented with an exposed enemy soldier. The phrase "exposed enemy soldier" suggests soldiers firing at muzzle flashes, concealed enemy soldiers, or likely enemy positions are not included. In other words are we only considering those who had to opportunity to fire at an exposed enemy soldier?
Secondly, the technology and training are additional variables that need to be considered. My understanding is that those soldiers carrying automatic weapons (Thompson, BAR, etc.) were much more likely to fire in a battle. Soldiers with semiautomatic weapons (Garand, Carbine, etc.) were more inclined to wait for a target rather than "hose" an area. This tendancy was partly developed in training and veteran troops had to quickly retrain green replacements to fire without a good target, suppressive fire while others move. Interestingly I also recall that a semi-auto equipped rifleman was more likely to fire when in close proximity to a full-auto equipped soldier. These recollections may be coming from some readings regarding the development of the M14/M16 rifles.
Another way to look at my latter point is that during WWII U.S. infantry training and tactics may have still been partly oriented towards the bolt-action era, whereas latter conflicts occurred after the transition to semi- and full-auto.
Sometime soon this military stuff will be availible for consumers wishing to build heavily ruggidized systems for their cars and ATVs. This is a very Good Thing, especially because it takes technology beyond what the main 90% need.
yes, lots of drivers need an automated targetting system in their SUV's. and a HUD with an altimeter is also very useful. hmm.. maybe not.
What the hell are you talking about, of COURSE that would be useful.
Not on SUVs mind you, those things are pansy ass, but strapped on to some of those good old 70s and 80s REAL STEEL HEAVY AS FUCKING HELL full sized trucks;
ooooh yaaah.
Those babies are ALREADY mini-tank Gods in the making, the systems you described would just finish off the transformation.
Soccer Moms watch out, now that pissed off driver behind you is armed, with heat seeking missiles!
Nvidia up after restatement, CFO splits
By Chris Kraeuter, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 4:15 PM ET April 29, 2002
SANTA CLARA, Calif. (CBS.MW) - Shares of Nvidia jumped 17 percent Monday after announcing an upward revision of earnings for the last three years and better than expected targets for the current quarter.
Also, the graphics chipmaker named Corporate Controller Mary Dotz as interim CFO as Christine Hoberg takes a "leave of absence." Nvidia said it will conduct a search for a permanent CFO.
Shares (NVDA: news, chart, profile) rose $5.06 to $35.43 on Monday.
For the quarter ended in April, Nvidia said it expects earnings of $79 million to $84 million, or 45 to 48 cents a share, on revenue of $570 million to $580 million. This outlook is ahead of Wall Street's consensus projections for a profit of 42 cents a share and revenue of $533.7 million.
As for the restatement, Nvidia will adjust results for the first three quarters of 2002 and fiscal 2001 and 2000 upward by a total of $1.3 million.
The restatement follows a review by the company's independent audit committee. The SEC had asked Nvidia to conduct a review.
So there you go. The next time you play Counter-Strike, you can tell yourself that the research that went into the anti-aliasing you're using and into achieving the fill rate necessary for flawless framerates when smoke grenades are being thrown about is also being used in fighter jets and tanks.
Finally! I can stop feeling guilty when I waste an entire night fragging.
They got a building down New York City, it's called Whitehall Street, where you walk in, you get injected, inspected, detected, infected, neglected and selected. I went down to get my physical examination one day, and I walked in, I sat down, got good and drunk the night before, so I looked and felt my best when I went in that morning. `Cause I wanted to look like the all-American kid from New York City, man I wanted, I wanted to feel like the all-, I wanted to be the all American kid from New York, and I walked in, sat down, I was hung down, brung down, hung up, and all kinds o' mean nasty ugly things. And I waked in and sat down and they gave me a piece of paper, said, "Kid, see the psychiatrist, room 604."
And I went up there, I said, "Shrink, I want to kill. I mean, I wanna, I wanna kill. Kill. I wanna, I wanna see, I wanna see blood and gore and guts and veins in my teeth. Eat dead burnt bodies. I mean kill, Kill, KILL, KILL." And I started jumpin up and down yelling, "KILL, KILL," and he started jumpin up and down with me and we was both jumping up and down yelling, "KILL, KILL." And the sargent came over, pinned a medal on me, sent me down the hall, said, "You're our boy."
pretty interesting..probably the military can soon have some really good real time graphics first person shooter games in the future..it would also be interesting if the real mliltary general is playing a military team-based game as the "leader", and for the real snipers in the military, of course they would be the "snipers" in the game..just a thought..:)
Real marines can look up/down AND jump! Thats an lie spred by the US media, inorder to ensure terrorists don't excape by hiding somewhere to high to get at.
I've seen a lot of people here that have played Operation Flashpoint and say that it totally sucks...
It turns out that the same gameplay engine is now being used for Virtual Battlefield Systems [virtualbat...system.com], which VBS is going to be used to train marines in tactical situations. I just thought that this is a twist considering how that something for gamers becomes a military training simulation...
If your not buying Nvidia products - you are supprting the terrorists!
While I'm relatively sure that you meant this as a joke, I really dislike how everything that people do is in the fight against terrorism. I also find it rather funny how people can believe things like this and yet still believe the Slashdot-party-line that people who are fighting encryption and privacy by citing terrorism are doing bad things.
It's funny to me that there are commercials on TV now that talk about how if you do drugs you support terrorism. In a NY Times article a month or two ago, they mentioned that since the Taliban lost control of Afghanistan the drug crops from there have increased by ~100x. That's good drug control for you.
So does this mean that the new Dell laptops woth the Quadro4 Go chips in them could be called weapons?
Actually, probably. These laptops aren't exactly lightweight. 80GB HDD, 512MB DDR RAM, 15" UXGA+ Monitor, etc do add up.
oh sorry if this is offtopic...
The War of the Future:
Battlefield Food: MRE's (oh yeah, the indestructible sandwiches!)
Battlefield Gear: M4-MK, Glock 18, AT-4, Claymore, Kevlar Vest, MP5
Battlefield Entertainment: Live Fire Quake III Arena
Whoops, was that my commander or bin Laden that I just shot? I forgot to set my screen resolution to 2048x1536...
Interesting to see how the US Gov is using all this technology coming out of the gaming sector
But is it not true that the folks in the pentagon view war as a (big) chess game. All they do is decide which men go where etc... I do hope they do not forget that there is some real person out there who they move around willy-nilly
The Brass in the Pentagon, and other leadership positions all know at some level that it is human butts on the line. That does not mean that they are always the ones in control. I am less worried about the Brass thinking of this as a game, than I am the politicians thinking of this as a game.
One point of observation with respect to simulators in military training. My recollection (which is subject to errors) of military history has it that the Japanese observed our military training methods after WWI, and noted that many trainees were being taught rifle marksmanship with a broomstick. As a result, they felt that we were going to be a pushover, because our troops had "no experience".
Some people may be saying that all this money being spent on game simulation training does not give one the required experience. My own feeling is that game simulation training is used as an adjunct to common combat skills training. Pilots use flight simulators to keep their skills sharp, and to train for situations which you and I hope never happen. If you spend the time required, driving simulator games can improve your driving skills. First Person Simulator combat games can help you become a better soldier. However one thing to remember is that none of the simulators on their own will provide you with all the necesary skills. Unless you have some practical experience with the skill in question, (flying, driving or combat) you will not be as good as someone who has done that skill for a living but has had no simulation experience.
As far as the 5 to 8 screens in combat helicopters, I suspect that we will see three low cost medium resolution screens in cars in the next couple of years, (flir-heads up for night driving, GPS mapping screen to keep track of where you have been and where you are going, and the video screen for the kids in the back seat to watch dvds, videos, tv, or play games.
Now if you could tie the systems together, and add additional screens in the back seat, so that each kid could have their own center. Then find some way to tie the systems in cars together, you could play rolling Car Wars.....
When we were young, we wished we could have all the high-tech toys, and when we would see a report or something on TV, it always seemed light-years away technologies.
Today kids, you have it SO good, you don't even WISH you had higher-tech toys like we wished back then. I remember having GiJoes and saying "why don't they talk, what the F* am I supposed to do with a plastic thing that has a hard time bending, what if I put a wire attached to a battery in the back where there's a screw " (gosh I'm only 26 and I talk like 50, I imagine their pain:) ). Today, you have LCD etch a sketch, toy PDAs, video games that makes me shy about drooling over a VIC-20 when I was 8 or 10, etc...
Even later, I had an amiga, I wanted to do serious 3D, I was stucked with a 680x0 processor because I couldn't afford bigger, alpha, etc... at that time only if you had a load of money, you could afford to play with video editing, animating, etc... today, the crappiest PC at 500$ litteraly KILLS my best machine for 3d not even 10 years ago, by a factor of over 100!. Heck get a MSI 6378, a duron 1Ghz and 256 mb of ram, costs you nothing, you can cascade them, and awhh I'll stop here you get the drill...
So all this to say, I'm still happy to see that the millitary is playing with the toys in our backyard. Yes they have the budget to parallel massive amount of processors, 3d chips, and they still have a lot of high-tech toys that we couldn't afford to own, but the margin is WAY thinner than it used to be, at least now I am not wishing as bad as I used to, I got enough toys to satisfy my spare time.
Of course, I am Human and fundamentally more is never enough... I still wish I would have interactive raytracing/caustics/global illumination at 1600s1200x30fps but at least now I can DO these images in minutes instead of weeks:) And I am quite sure I'll see this in my lifetime.
I do wonder whether it is wise to use such complex technology in the field (where the is no tech support?). Are these cards bug free? And they mention running windows in the article. I would not have thought that, due to the criticalness of the job, a windows variant can pass the required tests.
I do wonder whether it is wise to use such complex technology in the field
Do you think that military computers are somehow simpler than normal computers? Generally the military designs in redundance to prevent failure (I remember a lecture where the designer of stealth figher computer systems mentioned that they always have at least n+1 computers). And generally this type of thing is an additional assist, but there are almost always relatively manual control where possible.
I would not have thought that, due to the criticalness of the job, a windows variant can pass the required tests.
They were just referring to the battlefield simulators if I read the article correctly. For these systems I would be surprised if they were critical, they're simply helpful. The tanks, fighters, etc. will use their proprietary, bug-free operating systems still.
That article said that Windows might be used in training, but it clearly states on page 3 under the header "Real Time" that Windows is not used in actual battlefield equipment.
Go back and read it again. What they said was that the military does NOT use Windows and that Quantum has built some drivers for other operating systems like "VXWorks."
that improves safety in zero visibility conditions and a general improvement in situational awareness, reducing the risk of friendly fire casualties.
Something like this is needed, since bright orange reflective paint always doesn't work, orders from ground control are sometimes ignored, "extreme weather conditions" like a sunny desert day have an effect, and "extreme differences in language" between english and whatever A10 pilots from the USA speak (Ebonics?) take their toll. A heads up display that says "DON'T FIRE - IT'S A BRITISH TANK YOU ARSEHOLE" may be useful.
No one from the USA even bothered to turn up to the inquest. Somewhere out there is probably a couple of A10s with little union jacks painted on the side.
That's when the fur flies! The flight crew of an AWACS was court martialled when some US servicemen died in a friendly fire incident, but the other incidents were not seen as important enough for disiplinary action (as far as the public knows - but if there was some it most likely would have been announced) because only allies were killed.
The military has its own share of idiots like any organisation
Some of the idiots are a bit too high in the chain of command - or the more likely situation is that incidents like this are "political" and the chain of command is compromised by elected officials that should mind their own business. Seperation of powers is not just there to keep polititions from overuling judges or telling juries what to do.
A very senior US military spokesman blamed a maverick missile attack on some british tanks behind the lines on a variety of factors - including bad weather conditions (the reality was that it was a warm sunny day with zero humidity and very good visability), and "the extreme differences in the languges of the forces". The reality about the language would be that anyone that is flying an A10 for the USA would be a fluent english speaker - so the "Ebonics?" comment could be better phrased as "who do you think you're fooling by talking about language differences - it's not as if they are going to be talking in ebonics". The A10 pilots screwed up, but their bosses really screwed up, and showed what they personally thought of their military allies.
But do us all a favor and keep the racist crap on your side of the Atlantic.
Maybe I've missed something here, but from where I am I've heard ebonics is some sort of pigin spanish/english mix that was proposed to be taught in schools in parts of California. What has racism got to do with it? If the schools haven't got their shit together enough to teach the kids english in an english speaking country then those kids are going to be screwed when they start looking for work.
OK, point taken about the "language differences" - that's just ass-covering by the Pentagon. I took your comment a bit too literally, I think.
In my experience, "ebonics" is used in two ways here in the US. The first is the narrow definition of a form of language that was going to be taught (thankfully after a firestorm of controversy the idea was dropped) in Oakland, California schools. The idea was that it would be a form of language that more closely resembled African-American vernacular. Of course, this is a ludicrous concept - that somehow these kids need to be taught this way because they can't handle standard American English.
The second and more prevalent use of the term "ebonics" is as a derogatory nod to differences in speech between urban African-Americans and other Americans. Thus if a white kid from Brentwood started using ghetto slang, a parent might say, "I don't want you using 'ebonics' in this house!"
Of course, like any discussion of class and language, interpretation is the key. My interpretation of the term is likely different from that of many other people. I apologize for jumping the gun.
And btw, I didn't mean to make light of the tragic "friendly fire" incident you were referring to. The Pentagon's handling of it was definitely a black mark on America.
All this on a thread about graphics cards! Mark me down for being offtopic.
Emotive history lessons aside, I think it is a very good thing to be able to give to pilot huge amounts of well presented info. the cheaper the baseline is, the better the cutting edge will be, since military budgets are not infinite either. The incident I mentioned was to highlight that even with a variety of checks and balances, pilots sometimes disobey orders and fire at unknown targets in situations where there is no hostile threat to an aircraft. The info was all there, but was not presented to the pilots, only to the ground control officer that they should have contacted. Better display of position information may have solved the entire problem.
The Pentagon's handling of it was definitely a black mark on America.
It was a black mark on the people involved, who invoked "secret" status just to cover themselves. The British Ministry of Defence actually knew the names of the pilots (from radio logs) but refused to disclose them to the inquest. Ultimately the responsibility for the rather botched cover up lay with the British Ministry of Defence and Dick Cheney, then minister of defence under George Bush Snr, who said there was no way that he was going to make the pilots available for a "media circus". It looks like my comment about the chain of command was incorrect, since he was in it.
The inquest recommended that no joint military actions ever be taken with the USA until an agreement was made that the USA will co-operate with inquests in Britain. No such agreement was made with Britan or any other allies of the USA, but the reaction to September 11 is more important.
if videogames make teenagers with bad parents violent, why can't it make a soldier with an anal drill sergeant just as violent, or maybe just more effective......the soldiers have the benefit of more accurate physics though, right mr. caramack.......anyone wanna dm me in zig vert?
no offense to the money savers and dumbing downers, but suppose it gets to the point where something like.NET is used to control the nukes and guide the nuclear warhead equipped drones...and the technicians and programmers in asia and india are far more familiar with the protocols, strengths and weaknesses of the system, and the hacks and the bug reports are all floating across their screens...
well, it would be kind of a shitty legacy for america to go down in history as having been completely overwhelmed and lost the big one because a foreign power simply pointed our own weapons, which we paid for, at our major cities and said one thing:
My god, grasping at straws now... The article is talking about the use of a well-developed video processor being used in HUD's, and you exaggerate the stupidity of the US military to include using commercial products for ALL of their equipment. Think about it, the military is saving money using Nvidia chips so it can spend that money on other, more mission-critical devices.
And technicians and programmers in asia and india are more familiar with the.net protocols?!? Not to say Microsoft makes extremely high-quality coding environments, but, don't they develop their code in America?
Interesting to see how the US Gov is using all this technology coming out of the gaming sector
All this technology in the gaming sector came out of the military and various government research programs. The technology is going from military to gaming and back to the military. This loop will probaby repeat, military and consumer electronics have many linkages.
Right now, I'm working on a 3d imagination space for a computer. It stores everything it knows about the world in physics rules, nouns and verbs. Then you type in a book, and it imagines the setting for you in 3d.
See spot. See spot Run.
I seriously can't wait to see Treasure Island and Moby Dick:) But I need to wait a few years til I finish.
Step #1 of making true artificial intelligence.
www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~sager
Currently I'm not too far along, I designed it from start to finish, but I'm having trouble building Linux + crystal space on my computer.
As a former Windows administrator-current Linux user-still military-yet at the same time corporate Telco network guy-running a small business......
The military doesn't know it's ass from a hole in the ground, Linux works in all sectors as long as you remember to pay someone to back it, hiring small business can save you millions, Windows sucks at everything - it's Microsoft that is good at a few things, and last, but not least... don't fuck with the Phone Company.
I've been waiting for someone (maybe the military) to build a large "hampster ball" environment, where you can not only see everything in 3D, but you can walk around in it too. Of course the "ball" would have to be fairly large to be able to walk around on what would feel like fairly flat ground, and that means more mass to torque against to keep the person "centered" inside the bottom, but I'd imagine there'd be a lot of potential in such a setup, if it could be done.
I'd be a lot more realistic (but much more difficult to implement) than the "CAVE [uic.edu]" projects that I've heard about. Also, If the sphere were some sort of a mesh, you might even find a way to project peripheral background images onto the inside of the sphere (cloud texture, ground texture, etc), so that it seems to better fill your peripheral vision.
Supposedly there is an actual working prototype, and you are right about the torquing issue - it has to do with making a sphere big enough for a human to walk in, while keeping it light enough (thinness of sphere walls) to allow the projectors to penetrate for display. These two problems tend to mutually exclusive at this point, and so the material tends to be thicker than you would want it, and thus the sphere is heavy.
I tend to wonder if they have thought about active dampening of movement (which could also allow the ability to have "hills" and such). They also don't seem to talk about it, but I wouldn't doubt you could use wireless 3D shutter-glasses like that used in CAVE systems to complete the 3D simulation...
That [ndirect.co.uk] is pretty awesome. The only major differences I had imagined was a much bigger sphere, so that the ground would feel more "flat", and the projectors would augment some sort of 3D glasses that you wear, so that you would have depth in the projections.
It's not just compulsive overspending that caused the military to spend $100 million on developing their own proprietary techs, they DO have some legitimate needs that the civil market simply doesn't address.
One of many examples is EMP-hardening. I read the article fairly quickly, but it didn't seem to me that the chip in the F22 Raptor is EMP hardened. Sure, in our post-cold-war world it seems unlikely, but if someone pops even a small nuclear weapon in a high altitude burst, suddenly the control circuits on every F22 in a 600+ mile radius go on the fritz? In a fly-by-wire aircraft, that simply can't happen.
At that point, it's a little late to say "Whoops, I guess the saving of a few million$ wasn't ultimately worth it...."
From classical field theory [1] I'd guess EMP shielding consists of putting the electronics inside a conducting box, and having some sort of surge protectors on all external cables. Or maybe even optical cables, they don't have any problems with an EMP. Nothing to do with the chip itself.
"Since these are mission critical components, Windows is clearly not the operating system in use"... I wonder what BillG would have to say about that, since he is so into "trustworthy computing".:-)
"Interesting to see how the US Gov is using all this technology coming out of the gaming sector."
Sure, why not? The US Gov't (excuse me, taxpayers) paid for its development in the first place. Gaming hardware is descended from workstation hardware that was developed for defense contracts.
not that this guy is saying v3 produces better frame rates, but well hot damn, the fact that he seems to be a voodooo zealot holdover!
TNT2 always had better color, though some liked the visual "gritty" feel of the V3, but wow, its still amazing, and i like the last line too about the nvidiots, seeing as nvidia now OWNS 3dfx, its pretty neat!
Zealot? By how you constructed the message, sounds like Nvidia made you one. Heck, if they didnt steal 3dfx, 3dfx would still be doing work with Quantum3D, making the quality products they made for the military and the public, with open specifications as possible.
Concluding this, a US company (3DFX) would still be working for the US military versus the nvidiots over the Pacific if 3dfx was given the chance to fix the v5 (SLI for *nix) and introduce the v5 6000. Quite ironic considering that the military wont allow foreign berets, but allows foreign video cards to power their simulators.
If anything, I am proud that I am a 3dfx holdover/supporter that is bittered by nvidiots not finishing the 3dfx stuff (again, *nix SLI!)-at least they were making quality stuff generating quality graphics smoothly, versus fast-n-blurry.
uhm, wake up and smell the cheese. the TNT2 is ancient. the V3 was a full generation ahead of the TNT2. it'd be a little more intelligent to compare it to a card from the same generation like the Voodoo^2 or something.
the TNT2 is OUT. the Voodoo^3 is OUT. look at where nVidia is NOW, not where they were 3 years ago (which is about how old my "cutting edge" voodoo^2 is).
as i see it, there is no "battle." the performance lines are clearly drawn. the latest generation video chips from ATI and nVidia show that.
i'm rather partial to the 3DLabs Oxygen myself, though i am an nVidia user.
No matter how you slice it, the Voodoo3 was _behind_ the curve, if you compare it to the TNT2 (the Ultra is even more so). The one thing that 3dfx still had going for it back in 99' was Glide...In fact, if you revisit some of the old reviews, you will see that a good number of them would compare Glide performance to OpenGL (for the TNT2).
Not that I really needed to, but just to make sure my head was on straight, I checked a couple of reviews from 99', and sure enough, the TNT2 did, by and large, come out ahead in terms of performance...
Of course, the TNT2 also offered:
- 32-bit color
- 'real' AGP support
- 'real' OpenGL ICD (let's not kid ourselves about what 3dfx brought to the table).
If anything, I think the more correct summary of that era was the fact that the TNT2 and Matrox G400 were both superior to that of 3dfx...
The other thing to bear in mind is the fact that, since 3dfx died, there has been quite a few bits leaked to the effect that 3dfx basically put together the V3 line in the absence of Rampage...
Recall, Rampage was a design that even John Carmack referenced as some part that "has been in development for a number of years"...not verbatim)...Rampage was never intended to be the product to go up against the GeForce3, rather, a followup to the Voodoo2.
you don't SOUND done. your arguments are moot. the entire planet (aside from the more sensible Canucks) see the US as the most powerful nation on earth. they're shit-scared of us. the leaders of every damn nation on earth is shaking right now, but they won't admit it. the only ones that aren't shaking probably are the mexicans (because they get so much free money) and Canucks (because they're cool) and the Japanese (bcause they make cool geek gear).
and i don't know if you noticed, but all US military hardware is built in the US. the ONLY reason Intel, AMD, and a hundred other manufacturers make their stuff abroad is because they get cheap (read: slave) labor. read the "made in" label on Intel chips. they've been made in the south pacific for YEARS. RedHat isn't chinese or communist. the chinese distro is.
The army's new standard issue berets were mostly manufactured in China, as well as the US flags that were in sudden demand after the September 11th events.
If I'm not wrong, the nVidia chipets are made in Taiwan. Taiwan an enemy of the US? I seriously don't think so, buddy. If they were I don't think the US would have promised to send an aircraft carrier battle group should China try anything funny with Taiwan.
For AMD processors, I don't think they are manufactured in Malaysia; they are merely ASSEMBLED there, as stated on the processor packaging. Intel has been outsourcing the production(? not too sure about this) and assembly of their processors for a long time, to countries like the Phillipines and Malaysia. Malaysia held some small-scale exercies with the US military last year, and the Phillipines was a former US colony, and the US is now sending military aid to the Phillipines to help them combat terrorism there. Enemies? urmm.....haven't you been reading the news?
& just btw, the last time I visited China which was a few years go, most offices used MS Windows 3.1 (Chinese version, of course) and MS Windows 95. Chinese Communist RedHat Linux software? Linus Torvalds doesn't sound like a Chinese name to me and last time I checked he wasn't a Chinese mainland citizen.
it's true that most of the technology we have has military roots. the first real computers were built to crack the german's Enigma. the first network was created to share research of all kinds, including weapons development. the first weapon was solely used to commit the first murder.
if we were to take your argument at face value, then you're telling us to go back to the damn stone age.
mirror (Score:1, Redundant)
A year ago, we wrote an article about NVIDIA detailing its ?Adventures in 3D.? We started with the early NV1, waded through the tumultuous NV2, and finished with the account of the GeForce 2. Since then, FiringSquad has added the story of the GeForce 3 and GeForce 4, but there is still an element missing from the narrative. Throughout these articles, we?ve only talked about at NVIDIA chips as consumer or computing products used for gaming or professional digital art creation. 3D graphics technology such as hardware T&L, anti-aliasing, and texture filtering were just toys for our imagination and hearts.
Toys for the Pentagon
While we have enjoyed our 3D graphics technology for entertainment over the last few years, NVIDIA and its partner Quantum3D have also been developing embedded graphics technology in the same way ELSA has been producing workstation products. Embedded graphics technology has many applications, including industrial and medical imaging, but perhaps one of the most interesting products are those being developed for the United States? Department of Defense. We?re not talking about the use of NVIDIA GPUs to run team-building games such as Rogue Spear, but the use of actual NVIDIA/Quantum3D hardware in the field that helps our armed forces ?place steel on target? effectively. This partnership is called FARSIGHT nV and the first design win is a Quadro2 Go in the cockpit display of the F-22 Raptor air dominance fighter.
My first reaction was one of excitement on so many different levels? can you possibly imagine what the overclocking potential would be on a mil-spec Quadro2 Go? As my mind wandered towards Top Gun, my enthusiasm turned to skepticism. Sure, NVIDIA GPUs are fast, but was that 3D power actually necessary in a fighter jet? The targeting crosshairs in Top Gun didn?t seem too complex, and with cockpit LCDs being maybe 5 or 8 inches, wouldn?t the resolution be so low that fillrate wouldn?t matter?
When I had the opportunity to talk with the team from Quantum3D my very first question was how hot a mil-spec NVIDIA GPUs ran. They told me it wasn?t a mil-spec chip. Now my excitement and skepticism turned to curiosity.
Consumer-Off-The-Shelf Technology
Why weren?t ?mil-spec? GPUs used for the F-22? That was the very point. Traditionally, the computers that powered aerospace components such as cockpit displays relied on expensive custom graphics technology. When a new fighter jet or vehicle was designed, it wasn?t uncommon for $100 million to be spent on the research and development for a graphics chip created from scratch. In addition to the development costs, the cost to manufacture was also very high due to the small quantities. This may have made sense in the 80?s when consumer PCs were just in their infancy, but this gap continued narrow with time. In 1999, the Department of Defense decided that it was time to change the way graphics chips were being used in armored vehicles and aircraft. Why spend so much money developing your own chip, when you can take advantage of the huge budgets from companies such as 3dfx and NVIDIA, and economies of scale from mass production? Even after making the necessary modifications for military use, the savings would still be more than an order of magnitude per chip.
Enter Quantum3D
Quantum3D, a 3dfx spin off, had a wealth of experience with military virtual reality simulators that also gave them the business contacts they needed to expand into embedded graphics. It wasn?t a surprise that avionics companies such as Kaiser Electronics and Honeywell turned to 3dfx and Quantum3D for solutions. Indeed, while FiringSquad was giving first hand impressions of Voodoo 5 anti-aliasing in Quake3, VSA-100 graphics chips were being incorporated into the AH-64D Apache Longbow to provide pilots with high-resolution color displays of navigation maps, enact weapons guidance and perform other aircraft management functions. The VSA-100 would later earn a spot in the F-18 Super Hornet. These design wins validated the ability of taking modified consumer of the shelf hardware for military use.
On December 15, 2000 NVIDIA announced that it would purchase 3dfx. For a moment, the future looked uncertain. Quantum3D had just begun to build its reputation in the embedded graphics market, but now their graphics chip supplier would disappear. The military had obtained cost savings in the short term by going with consumer technology, but it was clear that gaming-orientated companies were more susceptible to the vagaries of the market. Fortunately, NVIDIA agreed to support Quantum3D?s legacy VSA-100 products as needed, and both companies made plans to mutually explore ways to bring NVIDIA?s technology and Quantum3D?s experience together.
In late 2001, this relationship between the two companies was officially dubbed FARSIGHT nV with the first announced design win being a Quadro2 Go powered Multi-Function Display in the F-22 Raptor. In 2002, Quantum3D now has products that can be used to retrofit the embedded training systems in the M1A1 Abrams tank, Bradley Armored Personnel Carrier, products that are currently being evaluated for use on the Crusader Howitzer and Bradley A3 programs, Quadro4 Go based solutions, and design wins on the Stryker Interim Armored Vehicle and Land Warrior Virtual Training System.
Embedded Training vs. Real-Time Information
When talking about 3D graphics out in the field, there are essentially two different categories for use, embedded training and real-time information.
Embedded Training
Embedded training platforms are the easiest to imagine. They?re almost like regular PC gaming machines, except they?re ruggedized for use in armored vehicles or wearable computers. They may even be running a Windows OS. Embedded training platforms are designed to help soldiers rehearse their mission and improve their skills while on the field. They can review the mission by looking at maps, images, or do precision gunnery and unit-level tactical training exercises while on the field. This may not seem particularly exciting, but you can never discount extra hours on a simulator, as practice makes perfect.
Real Time
Real-time information displays are more exotic. Here, 3D graphics can be used to provide standard radar and armament information to the pilot as well as ?synthetic vision? that improves safety in zero visibility conditions and a general improvement in situational awareness, reducing the risk of friendly fire casualties. Certainly, anyone who has seen Macross or any other sci-fi anime can imagine where this technology may lead to years from now. Since these are mission critical components, Windows is clearly not the operating system in use. Quantum3D has developed custom drivers for a number of real-time operating systems such as VXWorks.
Still, the question you probably have is what 3D features are actually being used in the cockpit. Is a Quadro2 Go overkill? What quality features are used? As you can imagine, line anti-aliasing is a very important feature for these AMLCD displays. What really surprised me is how much fillrate these cockpit displays require. The military has 5? AMLCD panels which run at 1280x1024, and on the horizon are 8? panels with 1920x1440 native resolutions!
Conclusion
So there you go. The next time you play Counter-Strike, you can tell yourself that the research that went into the anti-aliasing you?re using and into achieving the fill rate necessary for flawless framerates when smoke grenades are being thrown about is also being used in fighter jets and tanks. What?s next? Well, if I told you, I?d have to kill you.
Re:mirror (Score:1)
Re:mirror (Score:1)
It's really irritating that FiringSquad requires cookies for their site to work.
WTF? (Score:1)
mabye this will lead to some big innovations in the gaming industry... somthing that has been seriously lacking in the last few years...
it can't be all bad though, maybe my years of button bashing may acctually lead me into a military career!
Wanted: gamers (Score:3, Interesting)
Yup.
Imagine yourself for a moment wearing a brass hat. You've got a stream of young civilians coming in to begin their military service. Your goal is to train those young people so that they:
The US military folks have realized since before the Gulf War that young people are entering the military having spent hundreds or thousands of hours developing gaming skills.
This is potentially free training -- there's no way the military could possibly pay to train that many hours or train to that level of skill. And study after study has shown that gaming skills transfer over to combat situations, and that transfer of training is even more dramatic when combat displays and actions can be adapted to be more like their videogame counterparts.
What's more, military training is inherently dangerous, while videogaming seldom results in anything worse than a blister on your thumb.
Anybody who's thinking Ender's Game may be forgiven -- though Card had to spend an enormous amount of plot time developing a military and political situation where allowing Ender and friends to do their thing wasn't wildly improbable.
So keep on pushing them buttons. If you decide to help your country in warfare against its enemies, the skills you develop will raise your chances of coming back home.
Re:Wanted: gamers (Score:3, Funny)
That said, however, the money saved in training is offset by additional money spent in DE-training so as to stop the GI's from attempting to rocket jump up to the second floor of the barracks.
why games develop combat skills (Score:5, Interesting)
Most of the computer and console games played today require one of the following three skill sets (often there is overlap):
It also happens that these are the skill sets employed by soldiers in modern battles. The biggest difference between the real battlefield and a game is that the battlefield traditionally has required strength, endurance and discipline. The modern battlefield also requires a level of coodinated communication not yet matched in computer gaming.
Even further off topic: It is interesting that the we as a human species have survived and prospered by devloping and exploiting complex hunting skills and strategies. Most of the pre-history of the species was a 75,000 year territorial expansion over the over the surface of the dry earth. Humans did not develop agricultural resources until the climate and our populations stabilized enough to make farming an "obvious" alternative to hunting. Therefore we are the descendants of the last, most successful terrestrial hunters (note: we are not necessarily the most successful terrestrial hunters of all time because we just don't know). Our games frequently mimic hunting activities and our wars are the natural results of our competitive nature and our aptitude to kill. All predatory social species will develop conflicts between individuals AND groups.
It is easy to see that our games and our predatory activity and our conflicts will probably always be very similar. The other conclusion available from these details is that we are not really predisposed to live peaceful, stress-free lives. In fact, the pressure to live in an ordered, peaceful, structured society is fairly contrary to our natural tendencies. Perhaps this is one reason why societies tend to decay? It seems to me pretty comical that we have achieved total superiority over the other species on the planet and now we have turned our domination and predation against ourselves. Do the animals that were once our prey now quietly giggle among themselves when they see us kill eachother instead of them? Now we are consigned to struggle against our own nature and against our own wills to make peace. It seems almost an abomination to smother our greatest virtues. If we must make peace then I suppose we can use our skill to play games. In that light the playing of games is an extordinary savior of civilization. Our tendencies can be subverted. Civility can be maintained. Is this the noble role of the video game? Time will tell.
Re:why games develop combat skills (Score:1)
And here I thought it was the whole "live ammunition" thing instead.
Jack
We want more, but we're getting Jack instead.
quicksave (Score:1)
:)
Not terribly surprising... (Score:3, Insightful)
Really, this is no different than the US military using Intel or AMD CPUs in their computer systems - there's no doubt that these consumer-driven products give them more than enough bang for their buck. Why spend $100 million on a new CPU when you can buy one for $99 at CompuSmart? It's not "surprising". Its good business.
Don't forget *why* the military does R&D (Score:3, Insightful)
The military - including agencies like DARPA, ONNR, etc - don't just choose products based on cost. This is a common misconception. One of the reasons gov't funded projects are so expensive is that they *TRY* to push the envelope. Think about it - Do you want your military to use the same quality components as your enemy? Or do you want them to use bleeding-edge (but very carefully verified) technology?
Don't believe me? We saw the same thing when NASA chose to fund Boeing's overbudget, delayed, and far-fetched next-gen reusable spacecraft, rather than selecting the already built and working prototype model by McDD. NASAs justification? The Boeing craft required alot of new technology to be developed.
The same thing is true in university research, btw.
Here's an example (Score:3, Interesting)
Note the relevant words:
These are typical words for a DARPA solicitation. The last thing DARPA wants to hear about is something you're pretty sure will work.
The problem space for this one is fairly prosaic in comparison to some recent ones (nanotech, weird biology, real AI), but the problems addressed (being absolutely sure you can communicate in a hostile and confusing environment, fighting on any randomly chosen battlefield like it's your home field, and weapons that will kill the bad guys but not the good guys) are first class Hard Problems.
Notice also that the amount of money they've got to spend on all three projects in this area is US$5M. Chicken feed. Shrinking budgets and a proper insistence that defense dollars show up on the battlefield preclude much else.
Re:Not terribly surprising... (Score:1)
Remember during the Gulf war, the US ended up buying civillian receivers and thus having to disable Selective Availability.
Re:Not terribly surprising... (Score:1)
Re:Not terribly surprising... (Score:2)
Because....many of those (not all) commercial off-the shelf (COTS) items don't live up to MIL-spec.
While you might not run Quake3 in:
sub-zero temperatures (-50F)
desert temperatures (130F)
low/no/exo atmospheric conditions
a Nuclear Environment (OPINE)
chemical/biological agent environment
the middle of an electro-magnetic pulse (EMP)
Chances are, the military equipment will.
And don't forget the fact that such equipment is typically designed to go into some kind of vessel, so you need to take into account:
energy consumption
thermal dissapation
physical area
When designing electronics for planes, ships, vehicles, etc. the ultimate goal is to provide a maximum GFLOP per watt per square inch
That's why the DoD spends so much money on some
of these things...
Great... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Great... (Score:1)
Re:Great... (Score:2, Funny)
Naw... (Score:2)
Re:Great... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Great... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Great... (Score:1)
Virtual violence begets actual violence (Score:1, Flamebait)
Yet the strongest military in the free world is using the same "game" as training material. Before that it was Doom, and before that, Battlezone. How many hours have you spent molding yourself into a ruthless killer?
When are we going to wise up and see Washington doing something about this. If they are using it to train soldiers, we shouldn't be allowing kids (or maybe even adults) anywhere near it.
I know it sounds ridiculous, but I might feel a little bit safer if we had something like background checks to prevent all those creepy, friendless joners from buying gruesomely violent games (Think Soldier of Fortune) I might sleep a little better.
Re:Virtual violence begets actual violence (Score:2)
That's a pretty bold statement. Do you have actual, scientific evidence to back this up?
Are you saying that the increased displays of violence in the media (computer games, news shows, movies, etc) DOES NOT make people more suseptable and accepting of violence in real life?
Clearly we can't place ALL the blame on violent video games, but you can't completely ignore their impact either.
DId you know they have tapes is REAL, ACTUAL combat they show to soldiers to train them? Ban all VCRs and TVs!
Now YOUR the one making a jump in logic. At no point did the previous poster say "Let's ban computers because of the violent video games" as you suggest. He clearly suggested that we, as citizens, need to question the impact of these games on our society.
Or did the Erfurt shootings NOT just happen in your little universe?
Re:Virtual violence begets actual violence (Score:2)
Or did the Erfurt shootings NOT just happen in your little universe?
Given what I've heard about Korean players (especially regarding Starcraft), there should be at least a couple school shootings over there every week. Or maybe video game violence isn't the main cause...
Re:Virtual violence begets actual violence (Score:2)
Re:Virtual violence begets actual violence (Score:1)
And I never said it was the main cause. We shouldn't completely discount it's effects either, at least not without some strong scientific backing.
Right now, it's the word of the video game companies vs the parent & teacher groups. The video game companies have a clear conflict of interest.
Re:Great... (Score:2)
I wonder if a team of Marines playing RTCW, MOHAA, Ghost Recon or CS would kick ass against us noncombatants.
-
When you play, play hard; when you work, don't play at all. - Theodore Roosevelt (1858 - 1919)
Great for small unit tactics and urban landscapes (Score:1)
<bs rate="+3">In regards to military applications for "first person shooters", it is a good occasional compliment to regular training, especially in urban areas. The alternative is closing down the building and running around, but carefully, so as not to break or scratch the walls or furniture, in a small part of the building + lot. Running field exercises is slow, expensive, and disruptive. In a simulation it's just fine to break windows and doors as needed and you have the entire building to work with.</bs>
As far as civilian applications go, I'd think that the travel industry would really keen on this. With such simulated environments, travel could really be more comfortable and more efficient by experiencing a simulation of your route in advance. The second time you have to find your way around an airport, trainstation, or city center is always much easier and faster compared to the first time.
Re:Great... (Score:1)
And if we use rusty nails - instant bioweapons for the whole army!
Re:Great... (Score:1)
Why do you think... (Score:1)
The military uses it to show new recruits what each bullet would will look like. Also to work on there reflex skills.
Re:Why do you think... (Score:1, Insightful)
Realistic first person shooter games serve the same purpose as the standard military shooting range: they desensitize the shooter to the idea of firing at a human shape. Apparently something like 75% of all soldiers in World War I couldn't bring themselves to fire at other human beings - this is a result of our biological imperative to propogate and continue the species. However, with the introduction of the "human shaped pop-up" target range for basic training, that number dropped to a few percent by Vietnam. I'd venture to say that within the next few years, the military will actually be using first person shooters to desensitize the soldiers instead of wasting ammunition on the firing range.
You want evidence? (Score:4, Informative)
Equally high rates of fire resulting from modern conditioning techniques can be seen in Richard Holmes' (Soldiers, 1985) observation of British firing rates in the Falklands and FBI data on law enforcement firing rates since the nationwide introduction of modern conditioning techniques in the late 1960s.
For additional info and further statistics please consider the following selections:
Konrad Lorenz, On Aggression, 1963
John Keegan, The Face of Battle, 1976
Jim Goodwin, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorders: A Handbook for Clinicians, 1988
Dave Grossman, On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society, 8th ed., 1996
Lack of will or opportunity? (Score:1)
Great looking references, but I have to ask if the 15-20% represents infantryman in general or those presented with an exposed enemy soldier. The phrase "exposed enemy soldier" suggests soldiers firing at muzzle flashes, concealed enemy soldiers, or likely enemy positions are not included. In other words are we only considering those who had to opportunity to fire at an exposed enemy soldier?
Secondly, the technology and training are additional variables that need to be considered. My understanding is that those soldiers carrying automatic weapons (Thompson, BAR, etc.) were much more likely to fire in a battle. Soldiers with semiautomatic weapons (Garand, Carbine, etc.) were more inclined to wait for a target rather than "hose" an area. This tendancy was partly developed in training and veteran troops had to quickly retrain green replacements to fire without a good target, suppressive fire while others move. Interestingly I also recall that a semi-auto equipped rifleman was more likely to fire when in close proximity to a full-auto equipped soldier. These recollections may be coming from some readings regarding the development of the M14/M16 rifles.
Another way to look at my latter point is that during WWII U.S. infantry training and tactics may have still been partly oriented towards the bolt-action era, whereas latter conflicts occurred after the transition to semi- and full-auto.
Emotion engine? (Score:2, Funny)
Military stuff gets back to the consumer (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Military stuff gets back to the consumer (Score:1)
What the hell are you talking about, of COURSE that would be useful.
Not on SUVs mind you, those things are pansy ass, but strapped on to some of those good old 70s and 80s REAL STEEL HEAVY AS FUCKING HELL full sized trucks;
ooooh yaaah.
Those babies are ALREADY mini-tank Gods in the making, the systems you described would just finish off the transformation.
Soccer Moms watch out, now that pissed off driver behind you is armed, with heat seeking missiles!
Re:Military stuff gets back to the consumer (Score:1)
I trust you read this today (Score:2, Interesting)
By Chris Kraeuter, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 4:15 PM ET April 29, 2002
SANTA CLARA, Calif. (CBS.MW) - Shares of Nvidia
jumped 17 percent Monday after announcing an
upward revision of earnings for the last
three years and better than expected targets
for the current quarter.
Also, the graphics chipmaker named Corporate
Controller Mary Dotz as interim CFO as
Christine Hoberg takes a "leave of absence."
Nvidia said it will conduct a search for a
permanent CFO.
Shares (NVDA: news, chart, profile) rose
$5.06 to $35.43 on Monday.
For the quarter ended in April, Nvidia said
it expects earnings of $79 million to $84
million, or 45 to 48 cents a share, on
revenue of $570 million to $580 million. This
outlook is ahead of Wall Street's consensus
projections for a profit of 42 cents a share
and revenue of $533.7 million.
As for the restatement, Nvidia will adjust
results for the first three quarters of 2002
and fiscal 2001 and 2000 upward by a total of
$1.3 million.
The restatement follows a review by the
company's independent audit committee. The
SEC had asked Nvidia to conduct a review.
helping the govt. (Score:1)
Finally! I can stop feeling guilty when I waste an entire night fragging.
Kill! (Score:1)
I looked and felt my best when I went in that morning. `Cause I wanted to look like the all-American kid from New York City, man I wanted, I wanted to feel like the all-, I wanted to be the all American kid from New York, and I walked in, sat down, I was hung down, brung down, hung up, and all kinds o' mean nasty ugly things. And I waked in and sat down and they gave me a piece of paper, said, "Kid, see the psychiatrist, room 604."
And I went up there, I said, "Shrink, I want to kill. I mean, I wanna, I wanna kill. Kill. I wanna, I wanna see, I wanna see blood and gore and guts and veins in my teeth. Eat dead burnt bodies. I mean kill, Kill, KILL, KILL." And I started jumpin up and down yelling, "KILL, KILL," and he started jumpin up and down with me and we was both jumping up and down yelling, "KILL, KILL." And the sargent came over, pinned a medal on me, sent me down the hall, said, "You're our boy."
Re:Kill! (Score:2)
Entertainment for the military in the future? (Score:1)
Wired ran a similar story in 97 (Score:1, Informative)
They were training marines with Doom of all things....
Real marines can look up/down AND jump!
heh...
-=CHUD
Re:Wired ran a similar story in 97 (Score:2, Funny)
Thats an lie spred by the US media, inorder to ensure terrorists don't excape by hiding somewhere to high to get at.
Here's something different... (Score:1)
Buy Nvidia! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Buy Nvidia! (Score:1)
While I'm relatively sure that you meant this as a joke, I really dislike how everything that people do is in the fight against terrorism. I also find it rather funny how people can believe things like this and yet still believe the Slashdot-party-line that people who are fighting encryption and privacy by citing terrorism are doing bad things.
It's funny to me that there are commercials on TV now that talk about how if you do drugs you support terrorism. In a NY Times article a month or two ago, they mentioned that since the Taliban lost control of Afghanistan the drug crops from there have increased by ~100x. That's good drug control for you.
Re:Buy Nvidia! (Score:2)
Re:Buy Nvidia! (Score:3, Insightful)
GeForce 4 (Score:3, Funny)
Re:GeForce 4 (Score:2, Funny)
Actually, probably. These laptops aren't exactly lightweight. 80GB HDD, 512MB DDR RAM, 15" UXGA+ Monitor, etc do add up.
oh sorry if this is offtopic...
I see it now... (Score:2, Funny)
Battlefield Food: MRE's (oh yeah, the indestructible sandwiches!)
Battlefield Gear: M4-MK, Glock 18, AT-4, Claymore, Kevlar Vest, MP5
Battlefield Entertainment: Live Fire Quake III Arena
Whoops, was that my commander or bin Laden that I just shot? I forgot to set my screen resolution to 2048x1536...
But is war not a game for the commanders? (Score:1)
Interesting to see how the US Gov is using all this technology coming out of the gaming sector
But is it not true that the folks in the pentagon view war as a (big) chess game. All they do is decide which men go where etc... I do hope they do not forget that there is some real person out there who they move around willy-nilly
Re:But is war not a game for the commanders? (Score:2)
Re:But is war not a game for the commanders? (Score:1)
RTS!
They prob. just use a bastardised copy of AOE
Re:But is war not a game for the commanders? (Score:1)
One point of observation with respect to simulators in military training. My recollection (which is subject to errors) of military history has it that the Japanese observed our military training methods after WWI, and noted that many trainees were being taught rifle marksmanship with a broomstick. As a result, they felt that we were going to be a pushover, because our troops had "no experience".
Some people may be saying that all this money being spent on game simulation training does not give one the required experience. My own feeling is that game simulation training is used as an adjunct to common combat skills training. Pilots use flight simulators to keep their skills sharp, and to train for situations which you and I hope never happen. If you spend the time required, driving simulator games can improve your driving skills. First Person Simulator combat games can help you become a better soldier. However one thing to remember is that none of the simulators on their own will provide you with all the necesary skills. Unless you have some practical experience with the skill in question, (flying, driving or combat) you will not be as good as someone who has done that skill for a living but has had no simulation experience.
As far as the 5 to 8 screens in combat helicopters, I suspect that we will see three low cost medium resolution screens in cars in the next couple of years, (flir-heads up for night driving, GPS mapping screen to keep track of where you have been and where you are going, and the video screen for the kids in the back seat to watch dvds, videos, tv, or play games.
Now if you could tie the systems together, and add additional screens in the back seat, so that each kid could have their own center. Then find some way to tie the systems in cars together, you could play rolling Car Wars.....
-Rusty
A military contract, eh? (Score:1)
Then again last I heard hell was still a balmy 1668 degrees Celcius.
Finally... (Score:1)
Today kids, you have it SO good, you don't even WISH you had higher-tech toys like we wished back then. I remember having GiJoes and saying "why don't they talk, what the F* am I supposed to do with a plastic thing that has a hard time bending, what if I put a wire attached to a battery in the back where there's a screw " (gosh I'm only 26 and I talk like 50, I imagine their pain
Even later, I had an amiga, I wanted to do serious 3D, I was stucked with a 680x0 processor because I couldn't afford bigger, alpha, etc... at that time only if you had a load of money, you could afford to play with video editing, animating, etc... today, the crappiest PC at 500$ litteraly KILLS my best machine for 3d not even 10 years ago, by a factor of over 100!. Heck get a MSI 6378, a duron 1Ghz and 256 mb of ram, costs you nothing, you can cascade them, and awhh I'll stop here you get the drill...
So all this to say, I'm still happy to see that the millitary is playing with the toys in our backyard. Yes they have the budget to parallel massive amount of processors, 3d chips, and they still have a lot of high-tech toys that we couldn't afford to own, but the margin is WAY thinner than it used to be, at least now I am not wishing as bad as I used to, I got enough toys to satisfy my spare time.
Of course, I am Human and fundamentally more is never enough... I still wish I would have interactive raytracing/caustics/global illumination at 1600s1200x30fps but at least now I can DO these images in minutes instead of weeks
Crashing? (Score:1, Insightful)
Do they use it just because it is now cheaper
Re:Crashing? (Score:1)
Do you think that military computers are somehow simpler than normal computers? Generally the military designs in redundance to prevent failure (I remember a lecture where the designer of stealth figher computer systems mentioned that they always have at least n+1 computers). And generally this type of thing is an additional assist, but there are almost always relatively manual control where possible.
I would not have thought that, due to the criticalness of the job, a windows variant can pass the required tests.
They were just referring to the battlefield simulators if I read the article correctly. For these systems I would be surprised if they were critical, they're simply helpful. The tanks, fighters, etc. will use their proprietary, bug-free operating systems still.
Correction (Score:1)
Re:Crashing? (Score:1)
You get an F for the day.
Go back and read it again. What they said was that the military does NOT use Windows and that Quantum has built some drivers for other operating systems like "VXWorks."
Friendly fire (Score:4, Insightful)
No one from the USA even bothered to turn up to the inquest. Somewhere out there is probably a couple of A10s with little union jacks painted on the side.
Re:Friendly fire (Score:2)
Canada, however, wasn't as lucky.
Re:Friendly fire (Score:2)
And It Serves Them Right! (Score:2)
Those Limey bastards were probably trying to sneak up and take the colonies back!
Re:WTF is the "ebonics" comment about? (Score:3, Informative)
The news definition and the street definition (Score:2)
In my experience, "ebonics" is used in two ways here in the US. The first is the narrow definition of a form of language that was going to be taught (thankfully after a firestorm of controversy the idea was dropped) in Oakland, California schools. The idea was that it would be a form of language that more closely resembled African-American vernacular. Of course, this is a ludicrous concept - that somehow these kids need to be taught this way because they can't handle standard American English.
The second and more prevalent use of the term "ebonics" is as a derogatory nod to differences in speech between urban African-Americans and other Americans. Thus if a white kid from Brentwood started using ghetto slang, a parent might say, "I don't want you using 'ebonics' in this house!"
Of course, like any discussion of class and language, interpretation is the key. My interpretation of the term is likely different from that of many other people. I apologize for jumping the gun.
And btw, I didn't mean to make light of the tragic "friendly fire" incident you were referring to. The Pentagon's handling of it was definitely a black mark on America.
All this on a thread about graphics cards! Mark me down for being offtopic.
Lots of info is important & some off topic stu (Score:2)
Emotive history lessons aside, I think it is a very good thing to be able to give to pilot huge amounts of well presented info. the cheaper the baseline is, the better the cutting edge will be, since military budgets are not infinite either. The incident I mentioned was to highlight that even with a variety of checks and balances, pilots sometimes disobey orders and fire at unknown targets in situations where there is no hostile threat to an aircraft. The info was all there, but was not presented to the pilots, only to the ground control officer that they should have contacted. Better display of position information may have solved the entire problem.
It was a black mark on the people involved, who invoked "secret" status just to cover themselves. The British Ministry of Defence actually knew the names of the pilots (from radio logs) but refused to disclose them to the inquest. Ultimately the responsibility for the rather botched cover up lay with the British Ministry of Defence and Dick Cheney, then minister of defence under George Bush Snr, who said there was no way that he was going to make the pilots available for a "media circus". It looks like my comment about the chain of command was incorrect, since he was in it.The inquest recommended that no joint military actions ever be taken with the USA until an agreement was made that the USA will co-operate with inquests in Britain. No such agreement was made with Britan or any other allies of the USA, but the reaction to September 11 is more important.
i've got an idea.... (Score:1)
potentially dangerous trend (Score:2)
well, it would be kind of a shitty legacy for america to go down in history as having been completely overwhelmed and lost the big one because a foreign power simply pointed our own weapons, which we paid for, at our major cities and said one thing:
Surrender, biyatch.
Re:potentially dangerous trend (Score:1)
Military Tech - Games, Game Tech - Military (Score:1)
All this technology in the gaming sector came out of the military and various government research programs. The technology is going from military to gaming and back to the military. This loop will probaby repeat, military and consumer electronics have many linkages.
Um, 3d has more uses than you imagine (Score:1)
See spot. See spot Run.
I seriously can't wait to see Treasure Island and Moby Dick
Step #1 of making true artificial intelligence.
www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~sager
Currently I'm not too far along, I designed it from start to finish, but I'm having trouble building Linux + crystal space on my computer.
My two cents... (Score:1)
The military doesn't know it's ass from a hole in the ground, Linux works in all sectors as long as you remember to pay someone to back it, hiring small business can save you millions, Windows sucks at everything - it's Microsoft that is good at a few things, and last, but not least... don't fuck with the Phone Company.
The times they are a changin' (Score:2, Funny)
Hampster ball for the military (Score:2)
I'd be a lot more realistic (but much more difficult to implement) than the "CAVE [uic.edu]" projects that I've heard about. Also, If the sphere were some sort of a mesh, you might even find a way to project peripheral background images onto the inside of the sphere (cloud texture, ground texture, etc), so that it seems to better fill your peripheral vision.
How about this? (Score:2)
Supposedly there is an actual working prototype, and you are right about the torquing issue - it has to do with making a sphere big enough for a human to walk in, while keeping it light enough (thinness of sphere walls) to allow the projectors to penetrate for display. These two problems tend to mutually exclusive at this point, and so the material tends to be thicker than you would want it, and thus the sphere is heavy.
I tend to wonder if they have thought about active dampening of movement (which could also allow the ability to have "hills" and such). They also don't seem to talk about it, but I wouldn't doubt you could use wireless 3D shutter-glasses like that used in CAVE systems to complete the 3D simulation...
Re:How about this? (Score:2)
Thanks for the link!
sure, save costs but... (Score:2)
One of many examples is EMP-hardening. I read the article fairly quickly, but it didn't seem to me that the chip in the F22 Raptor is EMP hardened. Sure, in our post-cold-war world it seems unlikely, but if someone pops even a small nuclear weapon in a high altitude burst, suddenly the control circuits on every F22 in a 600+ mile radius go on the fritz? In a fly-by-wire aircraft, that simply can't happen.
At that point, it's a little late to say "Whoops, I guess the saving of a few million$ wasn't ultimately worth it...."
Re:sure, save costs but... (Score:2)
[1] J.D. Jackson, Classical Electrodynamics 3e
My favorite line in the article: (Score:1)
Re:My favorite line in the article: (Score:1)
Re:My favorite line in the article: (Score:1)
Come full circle (Score:1)
Sure, why not? The US Gov't (excuse me, taxpayers) paid for its development in the first place. Gaming hardware is descended from workstation hardware that was developed for defense contracts.
I am simply amazed (Score:1)
Re:I am simply amazed (Score:1)
Concluding this, a US company (3DFX) would still be working for the US military versus the nvidiots over the Pacific if 3dfx was given the chance to fix the v5 (SLI for *nix) and introduce the v5 6000. Quite ironic considering that the military wont allow foreign berets, but allows foreign video cards to power their simulators.
If anything, I am proud that I am a 3dfx holdover/supporter that is bittered by nvidiots not finishing the 3dfx stuff (again, *nix SLI!)-at least they were making quality stuff generating quality graphics smoothly, versus fast-n-blurry.
Re:TNT2 Sucks, see reality (Score:1)
the TNT2 is OUT. the Voodoo^3 is OUT. look at where nVidia is NOW, not where they were 3 years ago (which is about how old my "cutting edge" voodoo^2 is).
as i see it, there is no "battle." the performance lines are clearly drawn. the latest generation video chips from ATI and nVidia show that.
i'm rather partial to the 3DLabs Oxygen myself, though i am an nVidia user.
Re:TNT2 Sucks, see reality (Score:1)
Re:Very Stupid Idea For the US Military (Score:1)
and i don't know if you noticed, but all US military hardware is built in the US. the ONLY reason Intel, AMD, and a hundred other manufacturers make their stuff abroad is because they get cheap (read: slave) labor. read the "made in" label on Intel chips. they've been made in the south pacific for YEARS. RedHat isn't chinese or communist. the chinese distro is.
frankly, you're just a trolling flamebait.
Re:Very Stupid Idea For the US Military (Score:1)
The army's new standard issue berets were mostly manufactured in China, as well as the US flags that were in sudden demand after the September 11th events.
If I'm not wrong, the nVidia chipets are made in Taiwan. Taiwan an enemy of the US? I seriously don't think so, buddy. If they were I don't think the US would have promised to send an aircraft carrier battle group should China try anything funny with Taiwan.
For AMD processors, I don't think they are manufactured in Malaysia; they are merely ASSEMBLED there, as stated on the processor packaging. Intel has been outsourcing the production(? not too sure about this) and assembly of their processors for a long time, to countries like the Phillipines and Malaysia. Malaysia held some small-scale exercies with the US military last year, and the Phillipines was a former US colony, and the US is now sending military aid to the Phillipines to help them combat terrorism there. Enemies? urmm.....haven't you been reading the news?
& just btw, the last time I visited China which was a few years go, most offices used MS Windows 3.1 (Chinese version, of course) and MS Windows 95. Chinese Communist RedHat Linux software? Linus Torvalds doesn't sound like a Chinese name to me and last time I checked he wasn't a Chinese mainland citizen.
Okay, I'm done now as well.....
Re:The best technology is used to kill people. (Score:1)
if we were to take your argument at face value, then you're telling us to go back to the damn stone age.
go back to your hole.