Pope: Catholics should ask gay people for forgiveness

[Giancarlo]

Drone fighters are getting more and more advanced. Lots of innovations coming from that in Hawthorne, California, where many drone companies are located. Some of it kinda frightening

[Proteus_MST]

True ...
I remember the Norns from a game/virtual sandbox named "Creatures".

Those were designed as artificial life, had a neural network as brain (with multiple lobes), had genes that would determine their offspring (based on the recombined genetic setup of their parents and altered by mutations), and they could interact with their environment and learn.
RAF military researchers at one time took these norns and put them into virtual cockpits of Eurofighters. The first generations created one crash after another, but by selecting the best and letting them procreate, the new generations became more and more proficient.
In the end, they had Norn fighter pilots, which did maneuvers with their jets, that not even the best human RAF-pilots could follow, due to the limits of human physiology

http://karmak.org/archive/2002/03/norns.html

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.flight-sim/-NmesQBVHLU

http://web.stanford.edu/class/sts145/Library/richard.pdf

[Ben Kenobi]

Well I don't need to do anything. The idiots who hold beliefs like your own are all peeling over from old age.

You are part of a diminishing and dying belief system

LOL, we've been dying for a long time. But we're certainly not dead yet. And will be around for a long time.

You sound more like Trump now with your fake rants about how weak America is and how you want to make it "great" again.

In terms of relative strength against the rest of the world, the peak was in the 50s and the early 60s.

The question is... Great for whom? Surely not for someone you hate... Like me.

A strong America is the bulwark of the Free World. There really is no us and them.

America, today, has a far larger economy and a far bigger military than it did then

But not as large as the military was in '45. And there are things like Apollo that we can't (and don't) do now. We haven't landed a moon mission since the 70s.

The F-22 comes to mind. And even the F-16 is demanded throughout the world. Take recent Russian and Chinese planes - not even close. You are just a war mongering idiot though and you love the 1950s/60s... A time when this nation was almost on the brink of nuclear war with the Russians. A time when African Americans were lynched. A time when people like me were mentally and physically tortured.

Obama cancelled the F-22. I actually prefer earlier times, but the peak of America relative to the rest of the world was in the 50s and 60s.

[Giancarlo]

Well we don't want to go that far.. I hope not.

Ben should keep the name Hawthorne in mind. People think Silicon Valley is where technological innovation comes from... But that doesn't tell the whole picture. Hawthorne has many of these high end companies, including SpaceX. And many drone companies. It is basically become the economic engine of Southern California.

[Ben Kenobi]

You think things are failing because you're an idiot. Apart from the F22 which Fez already mentioned and the upcoming F35, the future strategy for the US is moving away from fighters anyway. Directly piloted planes are likely to grow increasingly more irrelevant in the future as humans act as a barrier to how effective they can be. Expect to see automated fighter drones and bombers within our lifetimes, we're approaching a point where putting human lives at risk in the skies will become obsolete.

There are very real limitations with such a strategy. You really do need the boots on the ground, and the pilots.

On a wider point, trying to judge a countries might on how often it produces a new type of hardware is dumb as balls. America has been so far ahead of everyone else for so long, that spending trillions extending that lead would be utterly and completely stupid. It's only stupid rednecks, retards and combinations of the two (Texans) that think that America is becoming weak (despite the fact it can still obliterate any non-nuclear country on the planet if it so chose, and could fairly easily win a conventional war against any of the others).

That's probably never been true that the US could easily win a conventional war against every other nation. Has not been true for Russia, possibly ever. Today, the US couldn't take on China in a conventional war and win. They couldn't do that in the 50s, either.

Personally I don't see China as a longterm enemy - due to their ****ty demographics, they are going to have massive internal problems. But your thinking is flawed. The US is probably about 10 years ahead at this point. If the F-35 program fails you won't, since the second world war, have air superiority.

[Giancarlo]

LOL, we've been dying for a long time. But we're certainly not dead yet. And will be around for a long time.

Most people who think like you are in their 80s. Most young people don't think like that.

In terms of relative strength against the rest of the world, the peak was in the 50s and the early 60s.

Some peak. Couldn't even beat China in the Korean war. The US today is unmatched and spends more on its military then the following top 10 countries combined.

A strong America is the bulwark of the Free World. There really is no us and them.

Cut it out with the American exceptionalist crap. It is what got this country in a quagmire known as the Vietnam war and more recently the Iraq war.

But not as large as the military was in '45. And there are things like Apollo that we can't (and don't) do now. We haven't landed a moon mission since the 70s.

Large in terms of what? Man power? You are outmoded. Technology supercedes the need for sheer man power. As far as moon missions, highly unnecessary. SpaceX is the future anyways.

Obama cancelled the F-22. I actually prefer earlier times, but the peak of America relative to the rest of the world was in the 50s and 60s.

The F-22 was canned before Obama. And it already produced plenty of jets. Plus there is the F-35.

[Giancarlo]

There are very real limitations with such a strategy. You really do need the boots on the ground, and the pilots.



That's probably never been true that the US could easily win a conventional war against every other nation. Has not been true for Russia, possibly ever. Today, the US couldn't take on China in a conventional war and win. They couldn't do that in the 50s, either.

Personally I don't see China as a longterm enemy - due to their ****ty demographics, they are going to have massive internal problems. But your thinking is flawed. The US is probably about 10 years ahead at this point. If the F-35 program fails you won't, since the second world war, have air superiority.

The Chinese aren't going to launch a conventional war against us. their biggest trading partner. Do you think they are morons, like you? China is a PARTNER. By the way, the F-35 hasn't failed though being very expensive.

You being an idiot is stuck in cold war mentality.

[Giancarlo]

This bigot prefers earlier times. One where people like me were not accepted at all. A highly intolerant era.

[kentonio]

There are very real limitations with such a strategy. You really do need the boots on the ground, and the pilots.

There are no limitations to that strategy. There is nothing a human pilot can do (other than die) that an automated routine won't be able to do faster, better and safer. As for 'boots on the ground' that's a very different issue, although we'll also be seeing automated battlefield units in the near future for many tasks. There's basically no real gain to having human lives on a modern battlefield being subjected to increasingly devastating and dangerous weapons, if you can do it remotely. It's only when it comes to things like population control that the human element is needed, and there America has a terrible record anyway.

That's probably never been true that the US could easily win a conventional war against every other nation. Has not been true for Russia, possibly ever. Today, the US couldn't take on China in a conventional war and win. They couldn't do that in the 50s, either.

Yes they could. The reason America backed down in Korea was because Korea was a hell of a long way from the US at a time when moving entire armies was a much bigger issue than it is today, and the US also had the might of the Soviet Union to contend with in Europe. When China flooded across the Korean border its estimated they took a million casualties. The Soviets were a genuine match for the US at some points, but after the fall of the iron curtain and at every point since to date American capabilities have been completely overwhelming. You get into questions of having to hold ground that is taken and so on, but the US would be unlikely to lose a single major engagement. The technology gap is simply astounding.

Personally I don't see China as a longterm enemy - due to their ****ty demographics, they are going to have massive internal problems. But your thinking is flawed. The US is probably about 10 years ahead at this point.

You don't see them as a longterm enemy because you're an idiot. They have over a billion people, will overtake American GDP in the near future, are pouring money into scientific and military research and are starting to spread their influence globally. There is a very dangerous flasahpoint coming between China and Japan that will likely determine the future shape of the world. If America handle it badly, it could smash US influence in the far East and establish China as an equal (and increasingly dominant) superpower, if they handle it well it could slow Chinese expansion and just maybe give India a chance to become a counterbalancing eastern superpower.

If the F-35 program fails you won't, since the second world war, have air superiority.

I've tried to read this sentence multiple times and I still have no idea what yu were trying to say. Rephrase please.

[giblets]

"straight" white dude thinks things were better in the 1950s

[Proteus_MST]

There are no limitations to that strategy. There is nothing a human pilot can do (other than die) that an automated routine won't be able to do faster, better and safer. As for 'boots on the ground' that's a very different issue, although we'll also be seeing automated battlefield units in the near future for many tasks. There's basically no real gain to having human lives on a modern battlefield being subjected to increasingly devastating and dangerous weapons, if you can do it remotely. It's only when it comes to things like population control that the human element is needed, and there America has a terrible record anyway.

....

Hell, yeah ...
you can even remotely take enemy soldiers as prisoners, as Iraq War 1 proved

http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1991-03-02/business/1991061100_1_rpv-aai-drones

[Giancarlo]

Boots on the ground aren't even required in big numbers anymore anyways.

[Giancarlo]

"straight" white dude thinks things were better in the 1950s

You mean the 1910s/1920s lol. Ben is messed up. He probably has a picture of Calvin Coolidge in his bedroom.

[Ben Kenobi]

He probably has a picture of Calvin Coolidge in his bedroom.

I should! All I have is my big Raygun banner. He looks lonely. And my Texas flag.

[Ben Kenobi]

The Chinese aren't going to launch a conventional war against us. their biggest trading partner. Do you think they are morons, like you? China is a PARTNER. By the way, the F-35 hasn't failed though being very expensive.

I don't think they will either, they have little to gain by doing so. Their window is closing pretty rapidly. I'm not one of the conservatives with a big fear of China.