5 ms·

The Most Terrifying Drone Video Yet

41 points by johnr8201 14y ago

icoder 14y ago
This stuff is science fiction at this point. Moreover, this article / video describes this scenario, when it ever becomes technically feasible, as if it would come without regulations, without (financial) restrictions and as if no counter measures would be invented in the mean time.
- moondowner 14y ago
  Just like guns.
- meaty 14y ago
  On the subject of countermeasures: I worked for a defense contractor over a decade ago which was developing countermeasures for such things. On the basis of supply/demand, they obviously weren't doing it for a laugh. With a relatively unconstrained budget, access to technology which is quite scary and secrecy regime, we might already be there behind closed doors.
  - nnq 14y ago
    how would the countermeasures for such things look like, really? I can imagine few things that would work: EMPs - nope, as they would be used most likely in a heavily populated area with everybody relying on electronics; an array of sensor systems connected to something like remote operated guns - too hard to do this without serious damage in a heavily populated are. There's few things that a team of "bad guys" operating in a heavily populated area can do to defend themselves from this tech...
    - icoder 14y ago
      How about a fishing net?
    - meaty 14y ago
      Directed microwave weapons (fry RF circuits), guided high energy lasers (physical damage), barrage nets (trap), radio jamming (kill ability to return information), doping logical resting points with glue (trap), ASTOR radar (finding source and destroying), honey traps (trap), building other drones to physically knock them out (physical damage), flares (sensor overload). That's what I came up with in a couple of minutes. Plenty of ideas floating around.
diziet 14y ago
From what I understand in terms of weight vs battery life tradeoffs, flight times are limited to about 10-15 minutes on helicopter like aircraft. That's nowhere near enough for continuous operations like those illustrated in the video.
- ohwp 14y ago
  Why not? Fly to destination within 15 minuted. Sit there for days using sunlight.
jholman 14y ago
It's worth reading the longer article linked from TFA http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/unmanned-flight/horgan-text http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/unmanned-flight/ho...
snogglethorpe 14y ago
Of course, the bad guys are gonna get them too... oO; "May you live in interesting times."
- mathieuh 14y ago
  'Bad guys' is very subjective. I would argue that anyone who wants a flying death machine capable of killing people with a button-push from thousands of miles away is a 'bad guy'.
  - dredmorbius 14y ago
    The interpret the phrase as "your enemy". The US and its allied forces presently have an overwhelming superiority in drone devices (airborne as well as land and sea based). Other parties are likely to catch up, even if only with more primitive devices and at smaller volumes of production, relatively quickly. The scenario which becomes ... interesting ... is where all parties have access to technology of this type. Criticisms of the US notwithstanding, the nation generally acts with some level of conscience and oversight. The same cannot be said of all adversaries. An Al Qaeda, North Korea, Iran, or African warlord with such weapons would likely have far fewer reservations in their use. Even conventional RC aircraft, radio and GPS controls, and small explosives or other ordinance could be used to lethal effect.
  - snogglethorpe 14y ago
    > 'Bad guys' is very subjective Sure, and that's one of the reasons I used such an obviously vague phrase. The point being that no matter who you define as good or bad, once the cat's out of the bag, it's out, and probably this stuff will be acquired by, and used by, people whose goals you abhor. And that's really scary. [I don't think that there's some sort of inherent connection of the tech with "bad", because there are always going to be certain uses, if maybe very narrow ones, which the vast majority of people would find justified. E.g. blah blah Hitler blah blah.]
ck2 14y ago
One day when the high school dropout in the TSA feeling you up at the airport decides he doesn't like you or that you insulted him, he will be able to walk over to a monitor and trace your past month as recorded on a series of drones - all cataloged by license plate and origin addresses. And I bet that day is by the end of this decade.
- qompiler 14y ago
  What's wrong with a high school dropout? You feel superior? Maybe you should change your attitude towards your fellow man so they don't hate you. Maybe a dropout was a drop because people like you looking down on others.
  - wladimir 14y ago
    I think you're reading too much into it, I'm sure he didn't mean to offend high school dropouts specifically, and that he means that too much discretionary power is put into the hands of a random person that happens to be employed by homeland security. Which is indeed a scary thought. Some people will always have reasons to dislike you, whatever you do.
  - ck2 14y ago
    That's a valid point to challenge my thinking about some hs dropouts. But if you feel there are any TSA workers who are thoughtful, intelligent beings, you are way off. It has massive turnover for darn good reason. Think about the lack of thought and care that has to go into taking a job like that. I mean you would have to really enjoy people hating you, enjoy violating people, or just not caring, and any of that make for a really horrible personality.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
  - shocks 14y ago
    Maybe you should calm down and stop reading so deeply into comments on the internet. People are so quick to get upset these days. Chill.
sheri 14y ago
In all honesty, despite the scary-voice narrative, I think this is a boon for urban war scenarios like Iraq. If I was a soldier, I would much rather see this vision be realized, than be the person to conduct night raids or go door-to-door to try to track someone. Of course, this leads into being used in non-war scenarios (Minority Report style), which is where I suspect most of the discussion will center around.
- alexlarsson 14y ago
  You assume you were the soldier in Iraq controlling the drone, not the one that got shot.
- flyinRyan 14y ago
  So we should make it even easier for aggressive powers to invade and kill innocent people? It isn't easy enough already? The more you make it hard for the people you're victimizing to hit back the more they'll be forced to the only action left to them: things like 9/11.
disbelief 14y ago
meh. "Most Terrifying" is a bit of hyperbole I suppose. I was expecting to see actual Assassination By Drone footage or a drone "liquidation" on US soil or something. Did anyone really not see this coming? Pervasive, ubiquitous surveillance(+) is fairly obviously in our current-to-near-future. The fact that others will be able to build similar technology (aside from the US military/government), while scary, might be better than the alternative (one power having a monopoly on ubiquitous surveillance).
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
singular 14y ago
I know it might sound a little bit unethical, but I find this coming revolution (+ I really think it is a coming revolution) incredibly exciting. Though there are endless evil creepy uses, there are also many very, very nice ones too - finding (+ even rescuing in awful weather with a big UAV) missing people is an obvious one, courier delivery is another (not with micro uavs though!) Having said that, I can't help but find the evil uses incredibly exciting too. Like military weapons that are deadly and awful in practice, there is some engineering loveliness there too (just look at an F22 for an e.g.). Sue me.
- flyinRyan 14y ago
  You'd have made (will make?) a fantastic Nazi.
- Flenser 14y ago
  courier delivery is another (not with micro uavs though!) FedEx micro UAV delivery was in Vernor Vinge's 2004 short story Synthetic Serendipity[1] and set in the same universe as his 2006 novel Rainbows End. "Jerry was looking upward, at the FedEx shipment falling toward his outstretched hands." [1] http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/synthetic-serendipity http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/synthetic-serend...
  - singular 14y ago
    Awesome, thanks! I will check that out.
- danielbarla 14y ago
  Technology can be used in many ways, and I believe it has no inherent "evilness" to it; it's all in how it gets used. You can do both wonderful as well as horrible things with, e.g. medicine, nuclear physics, electricity, computers, 3D printers, etc. Granted, the video shows off a military application of this particular technology, so there isn't much particularly warm and fuzzy about it. That said, I'm a bit surprised at the overall response from the tech sites I frequent (HN, etc); it's almost as if everyone universally agrees that this is the epitome of evil or something. IMHO, there are far scarier things that will happen in our lifetimes.
gokhan 14y ago
Cheap 3D renderings of hypothetical uses of not-so-technically-feasible dronish things. Nothing to see here.
- worldsayshi 14y ago
  Some of these things doesn't seem to infeasible, although some of the suggestions to solving the technical problems may not be very accurate? The wings seem rather awkward. The capabilities of these quad copters (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2la4pIyXOEQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2la4pIyXOEQ) aren't so far off. Then you have to add person recognition and a bunch of other stuff. It's supposed to be "moderately visionary".
- eplanit 14y ago
  I'm wondering if you would have said the same thing about quadcopters 10 years ago.
  - dimitar 14y ago
    Quadrocopters are still unfeasible today, because their flight time is very limited.
    - eplanit 14y ago
      Hmmm...I must disagree: http://robohub.org/video-throwing-and-catching-an-inverted-pendulum-with-quadrocopters/ http://robohub.org/video-throwing-and-catching-an-inverted-p... It's fine if you don't find this amazing. I do, and I think many others do too.
    - GiraffeNecktie 14y ago
      These guys are claiming 4 to 8 hours, 4,000 feet etc. http://www.uniteddrones.com/aether-aero/ http://www.uniteddrones.com/aether-aero/ Heck even 10 minutes flying and one day solar recharge would be awesome in an urban area for stealthy long term observation.
  - geon 14y ago
agos 14y ago
The point about “using microprocessor technology” sure makes is sound like real technology!
mistercow 14y ago
I still can't get over that perching bird drone which seems to have been designed without any concept of basic physics. It takes off via a single rotor, has no means of anti-torque, yet doesn't spin around uncontrollably during take off. It's like they asked an eight-year-old to design a drone, and then just prettied-up his drawings in 3D without talking to any engineers.
gatekeepr 14y ago
I should start a company in portable EMPs.
belorn 14y ago
Why would a bird or insect design use Ornithopter design rather than helicopter design?
- mmahemoff 14y ago
  So people think it's a bird or insect.
maceo 14y ago
There have been rumors for years suggesting that these types of devices (unarmed) are already being used for domestic surveillance. It should be noted that a google search didn't reveal any solid proof beyond eyewitness accounts. http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/insectdrone.asp http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/insectdrone.asp
locusm 14y ago
A bit like "The most terrifying robot video yet" after seeing the Transformers trailer.
- zarify 14y ago
  Well it was horrifying enough. I guess it's a small step to be terrified of another Transformers movie ;P
mikk0j 14y ago
The blogger who wrote this up as terrifying isn't really with the program. With a friend of mine building laser-guided mosquito zappers in her backyard, drones like these are relatively easy to deter. Of course it leads to an arms race, but maybe we'll eradicate those mid-summer bloodsuckers while we're at it. Drone proliferation, military and civil, is unavoidable.
- dredmorbius 14y ago
  It depends on the cost of developing weapons, the cost of countermeasures, the relative effectiveness of both, and target selection. Shielding high-value targets from ultra-small drones would be relatively easy. For someone bent on terror or softer targets, it's harder, and the attacker need only succeed once (or a relatively small number of times).
InclinedPlane 14y ago
Kinda stupid and short-sighted, I think. The technology won't work the way it's shown, it's just not feasible. What happens when you send a thousand tiny bombs or guns into a city? How do you make sure that they don't end up accidentally killing civilians (through malfunction)? How do you make sure that you don't accidentally end up arming your enemy since they can be captured with a simple net? How do you handle MAV's being counteracted by other MAV's and anti-MAV systems? How do you manage the torrent of data from an MAV swarm? This is just a half-assed fantasy.
- worldsayshi 14y ago
  You don't have them going on a shooting spree unguided. Even an evil military superpower will have a human making the last call on pulling the trigger. Have the drone sending a video stream as soon as it discovers a target that seem remotely interesting. Let the operator choose what get to live another day. Point being, a single operator can potentially control many drones spread out over a large area.
  - yk 14y ago
    What is the benefit of a human in the loop, if he is just trained to push a button when the red light flashes? AFAIK this is essentially the situation with current bombers, a computer locks the target, and another one calculates when the bomb should be dropped. In such an szenario the 'human in the loop' is just PR, since the protocols are specifically designed to minimize the impact of said human.
    - worldsayshi 14y ago
      Discerning between threats and civilians to a high enough certainty should be a challenge. And throwing out a bunch of drones that goes about semi-randomly doesn't have to be a liability unless they also shoot people and destroy things semi randomly.
- dimitar 14y ago
  The biggest problem I see is powering those little things. Their flight time will be measured in minutes with the current batteries. However, given the already remarkable proliferation of military drones I'm willing to take even speculation very seriously.
pointernil 14y ago
"The Diamond Age: Or, a Young Lady's Illustrated Primer", Neal Stephenson (as always ;) provides some additional "nice" ideas for this kind of future warefare.
ColinWright 14y ago
Exactly the same video submitted yesterday, to extensive discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5245345 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5245345
arianvanp 14y ago
My math teacher worked on a MAV project in the US before he moved here to become a math teacher. scary shit. He also designed systems for heat-seaking missiles and underwater torpedoes. He's amazing in a scary, lethal way

41 points by johnr8201 14y ago

This stuff is science fiction at this point. Moreover, this article / video describes this scenario, when it ever becomes technically feasible, as if it would come without regulations, without (financial) restrictions and as if no counter measures would be invented in the mean time.

moondowner 14y ago
Just like guns.
meaty 14y ago
On the subject of countermeasures: I worked for a defense contractor over a decade ago which was developing countermeasures for such things. On the basis of supply/demand, they obviously weren't doing it for a laugh. With a relatively unconstrained budget, access to technology which is quite scary and secrecy regime, we might already be there behind closed doors.
- nnq 14y ago
  how would the countermeasures for such things look like, really? I can imagine few things that would work: EMPs - nope, as they would be used most likely in a heavily populated area with everybody relying on electronics; an array of sensor systems connected to something like remote operated guns - too hard to do this without serious damage in a heavily populated are. There's few things that a team of "bad guys" operating in a heavily populated area can do to defend themselves from this tech...
  - icoder 14y ago
    How about a fishing net?
  - meaty 14y ago
    Directed microwave weapons (fry RF circuits), guided high energy lasers (physical damage), barrage nets (trap), radio jamming (kill ability to return information), doping logical resting points with glue (trap), ASTOR radar (finding source and destroying), honey traps (trap), building other drones to physically knock them out (physical damage), flares (sensor overload). That's what I came up with in a couple of minutes. Plenty of ideas floating around.

diziet 14y ago

From what I understand in terms of weight vs battery life tradeoffs, flight times are limited to about 10-15 minutes on helicopter like aircraft. That's nowhere near enough for continuous operations like those illustrated in the video.

ohwp 14y ago
Why not? Fly to destination within 15 minuted. Sit there for days using sunlight.

jholman 14y ago

It's worth reading the longer article linked from TFA http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/unmanned-flight/horgan-text http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/03/unmanned-flight/ho...

snogglethorpe 14y ago

Of course, the bad guys are gonna get them too... oO; "May you live in interesting times."

mathieuh 14y ago
'Bad guys' is very subjective. I would argue that anyone who wants a flying death machine capable of killing people with a button-push from thousands of miles away is a 'bad guy'.
- dredmorbius 14y ago
  The interpret the phrase as "your enemy". The US and its allied forces presently have an overwhelming superiority in drone devices (airborne as well as land and sea based). Other parties are likely to catch up, even if only with more primitive devices and at smaller volumes of production, relatively quickly. The scenario which becomes ... interesting ... is where all parties have access to technology of this type. Criticisms of the US notwithstanding, the nation generally acts with some level of conscience and oversight. The same cannot be said of all adversaries. An Al Qaeda, North Korea, Iran, or African warlord with such weapons would likely have far fewer reservations in their use. Even conventional RC aircraft, radio and GPS controls, and small explosives or other ordinance could be used to lethal effect.
- snogglethorpe 14y ago
  > 'Bad guys' is very subjective Sure, and that's one of the reasons I used such an obviously vague phrase. The point being that no matter who you define as good or bad, once the cat's out of the bag, it's out, and probably this stuff will be acquired by, and used by, people whose goals you abhor. And that's really scary. [I don't think that there's some sort of inherent connection of the tech with "bad", because there are always going to be certain uses, if maybe very narrow ones, which the vast majority of people would find justified. E.g. blah blah Hitler blah blah.]

ck2 14y ago

One day when the high school dropout in the TSA feeling you up at the airport decides he doesn't like you or that you insulted him, he will be able to walk over to a monitor and trace your past month as recorded on a series of drones - all cataloged by license plate and origin addresses. And I bet that day is by the end of this decade.

qompiler 14y ago
What's wrong with a high school dropout? You feel superior? Maybe you should change your attitude towards your fellow man so they don't hate you. Maybe a dropout was a drop because people like you looking down on others.
- wladimir 14y ago
  I think you're reading too much into it, I'm sure he didn't mean to offend high school dropouts specifically, and that he means that too much discretionary power is put into the hands of a random person that happens to be employed by homeland security. Which is indeed a scary thought. Some people will always have reasons to dislike you, whatever you do.
- ck2 14y ago
  That's a valid point to challenge my thinking about some hs dropouts. But if you feel there are any TSA workers who are thoughtful, intelligent beings, you are way off. It has massive turnover for darn good reason. Think about the lack of thought and care that has to go into taking a job like that. I mean you would have to really enjoy people hating you, enjoy violating people, or just not caring, and any of that make for a really horrible personality.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
- shocks 14y ago
  Maybe you should calm down and stop reading so deeply into comments on the internet. People are so quick to get upset these days. Chill.

sheri 14y ago

In all honesty, despite the scary-voice narrative, I think this is a boon for urban war scenarios like Iraq. If I was a soldier, I would much rather see this vision be realized, than be the person to conduct night raids or go door-to-door to try to track someone. Of course, this leads into being used in non-war scenarios (Minority Report style), which is where I suspect most of the discussion will center around.

alexlarsson 14y ago
You assume you were the soldier in Iraq controlling the drone, not the one that got shot.
flyinRyan 14y ago
So we should make it even easier for aggressive powers to invade and kill innocent people? It isn't easy enough already? The more you make it hard for the people you're victimizing to hit back the more they'll be forced to the only action left to them: things like 9/11.

disbelief 14y ago

meh. "Most Terrifying" is a bit of hyperbole I suppose. I was expecting to see actual Assassination By Drone footage or a drone "liquidation" on US soil or something. Did anyone really not see this coming? Pervasive, ubiquitous surveillance(+) is fairly obviously in our current-to-near-future. The fact that others will be able to build similar technology (aside from the US military/government), while scary, might be better than the alternative (one power having a monopoly on ubiquitous surveillance).

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

singular 14y ago

I know it might sound a little bit unethical, but I find this coming revolution (+ I really think it is a coming revolution) incredibly exciting. Though there are endless evil creepy uses, there are also many very, very nice ones too - finding (+ even rescuing in awful weather with a big UAV) missing people is an obvious one, courier delivery is another (not with micro uavs though!) Having said that, I can't help but find the evil uses incredibly exciting too. Like military weapons that are deadly and awful in practice, there is some engineering loveliness there too (just look at an F22 for an e.g.). Sue me.

flyinRyan 14y ago
You'd have made (will make?) a fantastic Nazi.
Flenser 14y ago
courier delivery is another (not with micro uavs though!) FedEx micro UAV delivery was in Vernor Vinge's 2004 short story Synthetic Serendipity[1] and set in the same universe as his 2006 novel Rainbows End. "Jerry was looking upward, at the FedEx shipment falling toward his outstretched hands." [1] http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/synthetic-serendipity http://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/networks/synthetic-serend...
- singular 14y ago
  Awesome, thanks! I will check that out.
danielbarla 14y ago
Technology can be used in many ways, and I believe it has no inherent "evilness" to it; it's all in how it gets used. You can do both wonderful as well as horrible things with, e.g. medicine, nuclear physics, electricity, computers, 3D printers, etc. Granted, the video shows off a military application of this particular technology, so there isn't much particularly warm and fuzzy about it. That said, I'm a bit surprised at the overall response from the tech sites I frequent (HN, etc); it's almost as if everyone universally agrees that this is the epitome of evil or something. IMHO, there are far scarier things that will happen in our lifetimes.

gokhan 14y ago

Cheap 3D renderings of hypothetical uses of not-so-technically-feasible dronish things. Nothing to see here.

worldsayshi 14y ago
Some of these things doesn't seem to infeasible, although some of the suggestions to solving the technical problems may not be very accurate? The wings seem rather awkward. The capabilities of these quad copters (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2la4pIyXOEQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2la4pIyXOEQ) aren't so far off. Then you have to add person recognition and a bunch of other stuff. It's supposed to be "moderately visionary".
eplanit 14y ago
I'm wondering if you would have said the same thing about quadcopters 10 years ago.
- dimitar 14y ago
  Quadrocopters are still unfeasible today, because their flight time is very limited.
  - eplanit 14y ago
    Hmmm...I must disagree: http://robohub.org/video-throwing-and-catching-an-inverted-pendulum-with-quadrocopters/ http://robohub.org/video-throwing-and-catching-an-inverted-p... It's fine if you don't find this amazing. I do, and I think many others do too.
  - GiraffeNecktie 14y ago
    These guys are claiming 4 to 8 hours, 4,000 feet etc. http://www.uniteddrones.com/aether-aero/ http://www.uniteddrones.com/aether-aero/ Heck even 10 minutes flying and one day solar recharge would be awesome in an urban area for stealthy long term observation.
- geon 14y ago

agos 14y ago

The point about “using microprocessor technology” sure makes is sound like real technology!

mistercow 14y ago

I still can't get over that perching bird drone which seems to have been designed without any concept of basic physics. It takes off via a single rotor, has no means of anti-torque, yet doesn't spin around uncontrollably during take off. It's like they asked an eight-year-old to design a drone, and then just prettied-up his drawings in 3D without talking to any engineers.

gatekeepr 14y ago

I should start a company in portable EMPs.

belorn 14y ago

Why would a bird or insect design use Ornithopter design rather than helicopter design?

mmahemoff 14y ago
So people think it's a bird or insect.

maceo 14y ago

There have been rumors for years suggesting that these types of devices (unarmed) are already being used for domestic surveillance. It should be noted that a google search didn't reveal any solid proof beyond eyewitness accounts. http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/insectdrone.asp http://www.snopes.com/photos/technology/insectdrone.asp

locusm 14y ago

A bit like "The most terrifying robot video yet" after seeing the Transformers trailer.

zarify 14y ago
Well it was horrifying enough. I guess it's a small step to be terrified of another Transformers movie ;P

mikk0j 14y ago

The blogger who wrote this up as terrifying isn't really with the program. With a friend of mine building laser-guided mosquito zappers in her backyard, drones like these are relatively easy to deter. Of course it leads to an arms race, but maybe we'll eradicate those mid-summer bloodsuckers while we're at it. Drone proliferation, military and civil, is unavoidable.

dredmorbius 14y ago
It depends on the cost of developing weapons, the cost of countermeasures, the relative effectiveness of both, and target selection. Shielding high-value targets from ultra-small drones would be relatively easy. For someone bent on terror or softer targets, it's harder, and the attacker need only succeed once (or a relatively small number of times).

InclinedPlane 14y ago

Kinda stupid and short-sighted, I think. The technology won't work the way it's shown, it's just not feasible. What happens when you send a thousand tiny bombs or guns into a city? How do you make sure that they don't end up accidentally killing civilians (through malfunction)? How do you make sure that you don't accidentally end up arming your enemy since they can be captured with a simple net? How do you handle MAV's being counteracted by other MAV's and anti-MAV systems? How do you manage the torrent of data from an MAV swarm? This is just a half-assed fantasy.

worldsayshi 14y ago
You don't have them going on a shooting spree unguided. Even an evil military superpower will have a human making the last call on pulling the trigger. Have the drone sending a video stream as soon as it discovers a target that seem remotely interesting. Let the operator choose what get to live another day. Point being, a single operator can potentially control many drones spread out over a large area.
- yk 14y ago
  What is the benefit of a human in the loop, if he is just trained to push a button when the red light flashes? AFAIK this is essentially the situation with current bombers, a computer locks the target, and another one calculates when the bomb should be dropped. In such an szenario the 'human in the loop' is just PR, since the protocols are specifically designed to minimize the impact of said human.
  - worldsayshi 14y ago
    Discerning between threats and civilians to a high enough certainty should be a challenge. And throwing out a bunch of drones that goes about semi-randomly doesn't have to be a liability unless they also shoot people and destroy things semi randomly.
dimitar 14y ago
The biggest problem I see is powering those little things. Their flight time will be measured in minutes with the current batteries. However, given the already remarkable proliferation of military drones I'm willing to take even speculation very seriously.

pointernil 14y ago

"The Diamond Age: Or, a Young Lady's Illustrated Primer", Neal Stephenson (as always ;) provides some additional "nice" ideas for this kind of future warefare.

ColinWright 14y ago

Exactly the same video submitted yesterday, to extensive discussion: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5245345 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5245345

arianvanp 14y ago

My math teacher worked on a MAV project in the US before he moved here to become a math teacher. scary shit. He also designed systems for heat-seaking missiles and underwater torpedoes. He's amazing in a scary, lethal way