10 ms·

Reminds me of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA Which is one of the scariest things I've seen in a while.

Reminds me of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA Which is one of the scariest things I've seen in a while. The video glosses over the fact that EMPs would probably make for a viable (if collateral-damage-inducing) defense, but still pretty terrifying.

pmoriarty 9y ago
"The video glosses over the fact that EMPs would probably make for a viable (if collateral-damage-inducing) defense, but still pretty terrifying." Some other possible defenses are other drones and flack clouds. A flack cloud in the classroom in the video might have defeated the drones. Both of these defenses might be staged strategically throughout various public places or even carried by individuals for their own protection. If drone attacks become common, anti-drone defenses are likely to become widespread as well. I'm personally more concerned about potential chemical, biological, and nuclear warfare, against which there's really not much that people can do, and which might eventually become as easy to perpetrate as conventional drone attacks (and might even be facilitated by them).
- keldaris 9y ago
  > I'm personally more concerned about potential chemical, biological, and nuclear warfare, against which there's really not much that people can do, and which might eventually become as easy to perpetrate as conventional drone attacks (and might even be facilitated by them). I think most of that concern is misplaced. It will never be easy for non-state actors to conduct nuclear warfare (unless you count inefficient small scale radiological attacks) and while a sufficiently dedicated group can synthesize chemical weapons, it's easier and generally more efficient to just build a big truck bomb (or ten). Biological warfare is more complicated, both because it depends on your definitions (it could be said that every person stupid enough to go to work with the flu is engaging in biological warfare, they're certainly doing more damage than all the world's terrorists put together ever have), but also because that's the one area where rapidly developing technology really could have a huge impact in the near future.
  - virgilp 9y ago
    > every person stupid enough to go to work with the flu is engaging in biological warfare Well, you could say that.... But it's about as smart as engaging in a fight against micro-aggressions. If you fight for a society where the individual can't even handle minor stress factors, you fight for a society with little to no immune system, that is all but guaranteed to crumble.
- taneq 9y ago
  The scariest thing I've seen in the past few years was that "artwork" with a culture (I think it was E. Coli but it might have been staph) growing on a large sheet of agar which had been doped with a gradient of various antibiotics, and showed the bacteria slowly adapting and working its way through them. A small change to this setup could easily be used to grow multi-antibiotic-resistant diseases in someone's back shed. I actually kind of don't want to post this comment in case it gives someone ideas.
  - bsder 9y ago
    Except that antibiotic resistance also goes away very quickly unless the bacteria are kept in an environment conducive to it. Antibiotic resistance is expensive evolutionarily. Most of our resistant bacteria are coming from something that makes holding onto resistance a survival trait. Antibiotic overuse in factory farming or hospitals which obviously are continuously battling bacteria are two of the prime generators.
    - privong 9y ago
      > Except that antibiotic resistance also goes away very quickly unless the bacteria are kept in an environment conducive to it. Antibiotic resistance is expensive evolutionarily. This is the first time I've heard this. Can you recommend some references with more info on it?
      - cstejerean 9y ago
        Here are two studies from the first page of a Google search on "losing antibiotic resistance", Long-term starvation-induced loss of antibiotic resistance in bacteria https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24196362 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24196362 Loss of Antibiotic Resistance in Staphylococcus aureus Resulting from Growth at High Temperature http://www.microbiologyresearch.org/docserver/fulltext/micro/42/3/mic-42-3-403.pdf?expires=1518151991&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=2A3A0392A30F07ACF8F576F19F7755FA http://www.microbiologyresearch.org/docserver/fulltext/micro... And here's a more high level answer from the Biology StackExchange on the mechanism by which this happens with a link to 3 other papers on the underlying subject https://biology.stackexchange.com/a/15930 https://biology.stackexchange.com/a/15930
mattkrause 9y ago
That video isn't real: check the "manufacturer's" webpage and you will see that it is part of a 'Stop Autonomous Weapons' campaign. That said, a lot of it is surprisingly plausible (though maybe not the grainy filming-a-CRT overlays).
- bowmessage 9y ago
  Of course it isn't real, but it's not far from possible at this point which is why it's such an effective campaign piece.
- mirimir 9y ago
  Yes, it's Adbusters-style advocacy.
- ralfd 9y ago
  Not only warfare: http://www.businessinsider.de/drones-carrying-drugs-and-explosives-amid-mexicos-criminal-warfare-2017-10?r=US&IR=T http://www.businessinsider.de/drones-carrying-drugs-and-expl...
- jstanley 9y ago
  Did you watch the whole thing? The part where the chap at the end explains the purpose of the video? It's not supposed to make people think it's real.
Waterluvian 9y ago
I don't want to search for it but wasn't there high quality video of a home made drone dropping an IED on a tank commander, instantly killing him? It's very chilling that this new vector of attack is very much here for everyone to utilize.
- kbart 9y ago
  In this scenario "IED" is a keyword. Drone is trivial compared to making a small IED capable of killing a person or damaging military equipment without blowing yourself up first. If one can do that, he's dangerous with or without drones anyway.
  - Waterluvian 9y ago
    I never would have guessed that. I always thought that explosives are easy with kitchen sink supplies.
nradov 9y ago
Non-nuclear EMP weapons are not viable defenses. They are short ranged, very expensive, single use, and require detonating powerful conventional explosives. The only effective defenses today are the same as against regular missiles: guns, missiles, decoys, ECM, and blinding lasers. In a few years high-powered lasers might become viable.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
robkop 9y ago
Ever since I saw that video I've been wondering how effective it would be to use essentially an upgraded fire suppression system to take on the drones. Essentially instead of spraying water out of the sprinklers, spray paint or other liquids that would block the vision of the drones. I think that would be a lot cheaper and harder to build defences for than an EMP. (Just realised that you could also spray a opaque gas which would also block vision and might make less of a mess to clean up).
- IntronExon 9y ago
  How about spraying a rapidly hardening foam or stringy polymer? Kill the damned thing.
  - robkop 9y ago
    I would worry about spraying rapidly hardening foam in a room filled with people (not sure if you can breath under it, nevermind how you get people out). String polymer sounds like it could work, my only concern would be if you could design prop guards for the drones such that they filter the air (very coarsely) and don't allow any objects to touch the props.
    - IntronExon 9y ago
      In the former case, granted. In the latter, you could also use powdered magnets, some form of self-adhering powder, etc. the basic idea of attacking rotors should be hard to defend against.
      - bsder 9y ago
        Pulsejets don't need rotors. https://hackaday.com/2011/09/05/engine-hacks-a-pulse-jet-uav-by-any-other-name-would-still-be-a-cruise-missile/ https://hackaday.com/2011/09/05/engine-hacks-a-pulse-jet-uav...
        IntronExon 9y ago
jcims 9y ago
If you don't mind getting yourself on a list, go to youtube and search for '2g ETN' (also PETN, APAN, HMTD, MEKP, etc). These are all home gamers, imagine military grade stuff...geesh.
- WillReplyfFood 9y ago
  Ah, the good old get yourself out of direct-customer-support no-fly list. If you love your family, having some blow up potential in the eyes of the fbi or cia, gains you some quality time.
- cwkoss 9y ago
  '2g ETN' pulled up a bunch of stuff about 2G cellular networks for me. Found a youtube video. ETN stands for Erythritol tetranitrate, an explosive. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug3qce3Sae4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug3qce3Sae4 Yikes...
  - cwkoss 9y ago
    Double yikes, the precursors are not hard to find at all. The only comfort I can find is that the process is probably just complicated enough that 50% of the idiots who try to make it will probably maim themselves instead of succeeding.
colemannugent 9y ago
I'm sure someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I think countering EMPs wouldn't be that difficult of a task. Commercial electronics designers have been designing around EMI for decades now. Is it that hard to imagine that actors would put in the effort to shield their devices? A Faraday cage around the electronics would go a long way towards eliminating the effects of an EMP. Even if you couldn't stop the EMP from knocking systems out, you could design them to come back online very quickly, making the EMP a rather expensive temporary measure. For home-made drones it might be effective, but those drones are cheap, and the attackers could always launch more. I just don't see EMPs as posing a real threat to any military. Am I off in my estimation?
- CamperBob2 9y ago
  No, you're not wrong at all. Most equipment that's designed to hold up under CE immunity testing is not going to be affected by EMP from any source short of a nuke.
  - analognoise 9y ago
    I'm not sure where you're getting this info, but it is wicked wrong. Ever seen a carrier's radar hit a drone? And that's nothing compared to NEMP waveforms.
    - CamperBob2 9y ago
      That's not a traditional "EMP" attack, it's a brute-force assault with massive, expensive, and power-hungry microwave transmitting equipment that is never going to be feasible to deploy against drones. It will be effective for maybe 50-100 yards. I can afford more drones than you can afford Aegis platforms.
      - ralfd 9y ago
        Fun Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XbLz0L6UdI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XbLz0L6UdI (Change it to english subtitles)
EGreg 9y ago
That video is very similar to the real life airdrop: https://youtu.be/CGAk5gRD-t0 https://youtu.be/CGAk5gRD-t0
Bromskloss 9y ago
Time to build that EMP-surviving car I've been dreaming of – one that can run even with all its electronics (except sparks) burnt out, falling back on mechanical timing and such!
- pryelluw 9y ago
  Buy an old VW Bettle.
- punchclockhero 9y ago
  >build an EMP-surviving car No need to do that, just get an old enough car/truck that can be started with a crank.
  - King-Aaron 9y ago
    Don't need a crank, just a manual gearbox and knowing how to roll-start
- King-Aaron 9y ago
  1975 Datsun 180B. I had the relay box catch on fire (in the pouring rain!) once. Put the fire out, pulled all the twisted charred copper off itself as not to short out, found another battery and bam! Off she drove again. If I hadn't stopped immediately as the fire started, the car would have happily kept running - it only needed the relays for the starter motor. Everything else runs from the points/distributor/alternator. If you had an old diesel, it'd be even better. Those literally have no electronic components necessary for the engine to run - mechanical fuel pump, glow plugs. They can basically run underwater as long as it's got fresh air coming in.
lost_my_pwd 9y ago
Which reminds me of Runaway (1984): http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088024/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088024/
Raphmedia 9y ago
Good luck detonating an EMP in the middle of Manhattan without crippling your economy...

pmoriarty 9y ago

"The video glosses over the fact that EMPs would probably make for a viable (if collateral-damage-inducing) defense, but still pretty terrifying." Some other possible defenses are other drones and flack clouds. A flack cloud in the classroom in the video might have defeated the drones. Both of these defenses might be staged strategically throughout various public places or even carried by individuals for their own protection. If drone attacks become common, anti-drone defenses are likely to become widespread as well. I'm personally more concerned about potential chemical, biological, and nuclear warfare, against which there's really not much that people can do, and which might eventually become as easy to perpetrate as conventional drone attacks (and might even be facilitated by them).

keldaris 9y ago
> I'm personally more concerned about potential chemical, biological, and nuclear warfare, against which there's really not much that people can do, and which might eventually become as easy to perpetrate as conventional drone attacks (and might even be facilitated by them). I think most of that concern is misplaced. It will never be easy for non-state actors to conduct nuclear warfare (unless you count inefficient small scale radiological attacks) and while a sufficiently dedicated group can synthesize chemical weapons, it's easier and generally more efficient to just build a big truck bomb (or ten). Biological warfare is more complicated, both because it depends on your definitions (it could be said that every person stupid enough to go to work with the flu is engaging in biological warfare, they're certainly doing more damage than all the world's terrorists put together ever have), but also because that's the one area where rapidly developing technology really could have a huge impact in the near future.
- virgilp 9y ago
  > every person stupid enough to go to work with the flu is engaging in biological warfare Well, you could say that.... But it's about as smart as engaging in a fight against micro-aggressions. If you fight for a society where the individual can't even handle minor stress factors, you fight for a society with little to no immune system, that is all but guaranteed to crumble.
taneq 9y ago
The scariest thing I've seen in the past few years was that "artwork" with a culture (I think it was E. Coli but it might have been staph) growing on a large sheet of agar which had been doped with a gradient of various antibiotics, and showed the bacteria slowly adapting and working its way through them. A small change to this setup could easily be used to grow multi-antibiotic-resistant diseases in someone's back shed. I actually kind of don't want to post this comment in case it gives someone ideas.
- bsder 9y ago
  Except that antibiotic resistance also goes away very quickly unless the bacteria are kept in an environment conducive to it. Antibiotic resistance is expensive evolutionarily. Most of our resistant bacteria are coming from something that makes holding onto resistance a survival trait. Antibiotic overuse in factory farming or hospitals which obviously are continuously battling bacteria are two of the prime generators.
  - privong 9y ago
    > Except that antibiotic resistance also goes away very quickly unless the bacteria are kept in an environment conducive to it. Antibiotic resistance is expensive evolutionarily. This is the first time I've heard this. Can you recommend some references with more info on it?
    - cstejerean 9y ago
      Here are two studies from the first page of a Google search on "losing antibiotic resistance", Long-term starvation-induced loss of antibiotic resistance in bacteria https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24196362 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24196362 Loss of Antibiotic Resistance in Staphylococcus aureus Resulting from Growth at High Temperature http://www.microbiologyresearch.org/docserver/fulltext/micro/42/3/mic-42-3-403.pdf?expires=1518151991&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=2A3A0392A30F07ACF8F576F19F7755FA http://www.microbiologyresearch.org/docserver/fulltext/micro... And here's a more high level answer from the Biology StackExchange on the mechanism by which this happens with a link to 3 other papers on the underlying subject https://biology.stackexchange.com/a/15930 https://biology.stackexchange.com/a/15930

mattkrause 9y ago

That video isn't real: check the "manufacturer's" webpage and you will see that it is part of a 'Stop Autonomous Weapons' campaign. That said, a lot of it is surprisingly plausible (though maybe not the grainy filming-a-CRT overlays).

bowmessage 9y ago
Of course it isn't real, but it's not far from possible at this point which is why it's such an effective campaign piece.
mirimir 9y ago
Yes, it's Adbusters-style advocacy.
ralfd 9y ago
Not only warfare: http://www.businessinsider.de/drones-carrying-drugs-and-explosives-amid-mexicos-criminal-warfare-2017-10?r=US&IR=T http://www.businessinsider.de/drones-carrying-drugs-and-expl...
jstanley 9y ago
Did you watch the whole thing? The part where the chap at the end explains the purpose of the video? It's not supposed to make people think it's real.

Waterluvian 9y ago

I don't want to search for it but wasn't there high quality video of a home made drone dropping an IED on a tank commander, instantly killing him? It's very chilling that this new vector of attack is very much here for everyone to utilize.

kbart 9y ago
In this scenario "IED" is a keyword. Drone is trivial compared to making a small IED capable of killing a person or damaging military equipment without blowing yourself up first. If one can do that, he's dangerous with or without drones anyway.
- Waterluvian 9y ago
  I never would have guessed that. I always thought that explosives are easy with kitchen sink supplies.

nradov 9y ago

Non-nuclear EMP weapons are not viable defenses. They are short ranged, very expensive, single use, and require detonating powerful conventional explosives. The only effective defenses today are the same as against regular missiles: guns, missiles, decoys, ECM, and blinding lasers. In a few years high-powered lasers might become viable.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

robkop 9y ago

Ever since I saw that video I've been wondering how effective it would be to use essentially an upgraded fire suppression system to take on the drones. Essentially instead of spraying water out of the sprinklers, spray paint or other liquids that would block the vision of the drones. I think that would be a lot cheaper and harder to build defences for than an EMP. (Just realised that you could also spray a opaque gas which would also block vision and might make less of a mess to clean up).

IntronExon 9y ago
How about spraying a rapidly hardening foam or stringy polymer? Kill the damned thing.
- robkop 9y ago
  I would worry about spraying rapidly hardening foam in a room filled with people (not sure if you can breath under it, nevermind how you get people out). String polymer sounds like it could work, my only concern would be if you could design prop guards for the drones such that they filter the air (very coarsely) and don't allow any objects to touch the props.
  - IntronExon 9y ago
    In the former case, granted. In the latter, you could also use powdered magnets, some form of self-adhering powder, etc. the basic idea of attacking rotors should be hard to defend against.
    - bsder 9y ago
      Pulsejets don't need rotors. https://hackaday.com/2011/09/05/engine-hacks-a-pulse-jet-uav-by-any-other-name-would-still-be-a-cruise-missile/ https://hackaday.com/2011/09/05/engine-hacks-a-pulse-jet-uav...
      - IntronExon 9y ago

jcims 9y ago

If you don't mind getting yourself on a list, go to youtube and search for '2g ETN' (also PETN, APAN, HMTD, MEKP, etc). These are all home gamers, imagine military grade stuff...geesh.

WillReplyfFood 9y ago
Ah, the good old get yourself out of direct-customer-support no-fly list. If you love your family, having some blow up potential in the eyes of the fbi or cia, gains you some quality time.
cwkoss 9y ago
'2g ETN' pulled up a bunch of stuff about 2G cellular networks for me. Found a youtube video. ETN stands for Erythritol tetranitrate, an explosive. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug3qce3Sae4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug3qce3Sae4 Yikes...
- cwkoss 9y ago
  Double yikes, the precursors are not hard to find at all. The only comfort I can find is that the process is probably just complicated enough that 50% of the idiots who try to make it will probably maim themselves instead of succeeding.

colemannugent 9y ago

I'm sure someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I think countering EMPs wouldn't be that difficult of a task. Commercial electronics designers have been designing around EMI for decades now. Is it that hard to imagine that actors would put in the effort to shield their devices? A Faraday cage around the electronics would go a long way towards eliminating the effects of an EMP. Even if you couldn't stop the EMP from knocking systems out, you could design them to come back online very quickly, making the EMP a rather expensive temporary measure. For home-made drones it might be effective, but those drones are cheap, and the attackers could always launch more. I just don't see EMPs as posing a real threat to any military. Am I off in my estimation?

CamperBob2 9y ago
No, you're not wrong at all. Most equipment that's designed to hold up under CE immunity testing is not going to be affected by EMP from any source short of a nuke.
- analognoise 9y ago
  I'm not sure where you're getting this info, but it is wicked wrong. Ever seen a carrier's radar hit a drone? And that's nothing compared to NEMP waveforms.
  - CamperBob2 9y ago
    That's not a traditional "EMP" attack, it's a brute-force assault with massive, expensive, and power-hungry microwave transmitting equipment that is never going to be feasible to deploy against drones. It will be effective for maybe 50-100 yards. I can afford more drones than you can afford Aegis platforms.
    - ralfd 9y ago
      Fun Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XbLz0L6UdI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XbLz0L6UdI (Change it to english subtitles)

EGreg 9y ago

That video is very similar to the real life airdrop: https://youtu.be/CGAk5gRD-t0 https://youtu.be/CGAk5gRD-t0

Bromskloss 9y ago

Time to build that EMP-surviving car I've been dreaming of – one that can run even with all its electronics (except sparks) burnt out, falling back on mechanical timing and such!

pryelluw 9y ago
Buy an old VW Bettle.
punchclockhero 9y ago
>build an EMP-surviving car No need to do that, just get an old enough car/truck that can be started with a crank.
- King-Aaron 9y ago
  Don't need a crank, just a manual gearbox and knowing how to roll-start
King-Aaron 9y ago
1975 Datsun 180B. I had the relay box catch on fire (in the pouring rain!) once. Put the fire out, pulled all the twisted charred copper off itself as not to short out, found another battery and bam! Off she drove again. If I hadn't stopped immediately as the fire started, the car would have happily kept running - it only needed the relays for the starter motor. Everything else runs from the points/distributor/alternator. If you had an old diesel, it'd be even better. Those literally have no electronic components necessary for the engine to run - mechanical fuel pump, glow plugs. They can basically run underwater as long as it's got fresh air coming in.

lost_my_pwd 9y ago

Which reminds me of Runaway (1984): http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088024/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0088024/

Raphmedia 9y ago

Good luck detonating an EMP in the middle of Manhattan without crippling your economy...