case0x00
Joined 5 years ago
Joined 5 years ago
"And, I'm sorry, how long have we been tracking it. I'm not going to go into all the details because I don't want to reveal sensitive information. But I will say we have been tracking it for some time. And we have had custody of it the entire time it has been over U.S. airspace, entered the continental United States airspace a couple of days ago."
I think it only makes sense for battlefield surveillance if its augmenting some small gap in existing ISR operations, combined with UAVs + satellites + whatever other aircraft. it definitely would not replace any of those aforementioned vehicles/technologies wholesale.
also note in the DOD press briefing they stated that this was markedly different than previous incursions due to primarily the duration of loitering.
also what are these comments..? openly lauding an adversarial state which is conducting flagrant surveillance operations in the continental united states? yikes.
As an engineer I can't help but be kind of impressed with narco subs, especially traversing the atlantic from south america to europe. I wonder where this arms race will go: unmanned narco subs? weaponized narco subs?? yikes.
Driving of cars is a massive cooperative game with high stakes, and autonomous cars essentially need AGI in order to play to a degree that is safer than a human with other humans. Fully autonomous cars would be sick, but IMO you'd need massive infrastructure changes (realistically restricted to cities/urbanized areas) if you want autonomous cars to work with anything less than AGI. Until companies start pursuing that, they are actually unknowingly using all that money to push for AGI and obviously coming up short because they don't even understand what they are trying to do.
Also the author of the post has worked on some really cool stuff. They work at NASA JSC and their Fortran code is being used for the Artemis I mission (https://twitter.com/DegenerateConic/status/15615313400670617...) which is gnarly.