Full Version: [RL] US 'plans stealth shark spies'
The poor sharks. Its just being nasty.
On a more practical note considering there primary aim is stealth recon and radio signals don’t penetrate water how are they going to receive data from the shark. That can sent sonar to it if they don’t mind giving away the position of the transmitters (probably going to have to put on the bottom of a boat, 300km means you need a lot if you want to cover the pacific) but sending signals back that way would give away the sharks position (and what you are using it for).
Edward
On a more practical note considering there primary aim is stealth recon and radio signals don’t penetrate water how are they going to receive data from the shark. That can sent sonar to it if they don’t mind giving away the position of the transmitters (probably going to have to put on the bottom of a boat, 300km means you need a lot if you want to cover the pacific) but sending signals back that way would give away the sharks position (and what you are using it for).
Edward
They probably have the sharks on a one way link that says something like "Go to these GPS coordinates, record, return to these coordinates, and transmit."
In my opinion this is sick. Using an animal as a mere robot.. 
What is the equivalent in SR? Snake eyes system?
And they're not robots. It's just that we have electrodes hooked up to their brains.
And they're not robots. It's just that we have electrodes hooked up to their brains.
I would guess that the shark control computer would have an inertial navigation system. The spy shark would be deployed by a submarine, the shark would swim to the area to be examined, then swim back to the sub for pickup, where the mission data would be organized.
I guess it would also be possible to add a small sat radio bouy to the shark (if you could get if small enough), that would be released if the shark 'saw' something that was time critical.
I guess it would also be possible to add a small sat radio bouy to the shark (if you could get if small enough), that would be released if the shark 'saw' something that was time critical.
It is sick. The easy wayto set it up subverts the sharks motor control, not decision making.
Shark brain log
Fish detected
Move towards fish
TURN LEFT
Why am I turning from my fish
I was hungry, I saw a tasty fish,
SWIM FAST
I want to go to the fish, why is my tale doing that, I didn’t want my tale to do that.
Large high electrical emanation, high regular sound emanating object to the right
Threat assessment----high
Turn left
TURN RIGHT
Swim fast
SWIM SLOW
I’m scared, im slowly moving around something I can’t eat that will probably eat me and my body won’t do as I tell it and my head itches
Panic---
SWIM CARMLY
Mental panic.
Again being practical GPS uses radio signals so you cant use it under water.
Edward
Shark brain log
Fish detected
Move towards fish
TURN LEFT
Why am I turning from my fish
I was hungry, I saw a tasty fish,
SWIM FAST
I want to go to the fish, why is my tale doing that, I didn’t want my tale to do that.
Large high electrical emanation, high regular sound emanating object to the right
Threat assessment----high
Turn left
TURN RIGHT
Swim fast
SWIM SLOW
I’m scared, im slowly moving around something I can’t eat that will probably eat me and my body won’t do as I tell it and my head itches
Panic---
SWIM CARMLY
Mental panic.
Again being practical GPS uses radio signals so you cant use it under water.
Edward
The bottom line here is that you can sent people to do that job, or sharks. As this job may involved getting blown up, and the sharks don't vote, who do you think is going to end up going?
Also, sharks aren't smart enough to think like that example.
Actually that is not the point. Remote controlling a living being is unethical.
| QUOTE (nick012000 @ Mar 3 2006, 06:25 PM) |
| Also, sharks aren't smart enough to think like that example. |
True, I was being overly dramatic but the principal is sound
There smart enough to poses the four Fs.
Flight, flight, feed, fuck.
Whenever the actions commanded are in direct opposition to the dominant one of those a fear response will be initiated that will manifest as there fight or flight, probably no stronger than the initial reaction so not a problem, unless the initial instinct was flight, if this is the case the inability to flee with increase the strength of response, all you need to do to see this is watch any animal unable to escape a predator, the tactics attempted get more and more desperate often to the point where the prey takes suicidal action trying to escape or dies due to the stress (heart failure due to to high a demand/high adrenilin levels) I have seen fish come close to this state before I removed them to a safe environment (tank of there own) so don’t tell me a shark cant experience it
Edward
Edit, it let me say fuck?????
| QUOTE (Oracle @ Mar 3 2006, 05:34 AM) |
| Actually that is not the point. Remote controlling a living being is unethical. |
Tell that to Deus...
edit: I know, I know, but it just sounded good when I was typing it up, lack of sleep is what I'll blame it on.
Anyway, this reminds me of the work they're doing on cockroaches, I don't think people care nearly as much for bugs. Rats... well, they may be cuddly enough to some to warrant protesting against such use.
Still, interesting stuff.
In fact the manipulation of cockroaches is as scary as this.
The latest in a long line of strange animals used for military purposes. In the 80's there were Dolphins traind to patrol and demine harbors, in WWII there was a plan to build a smart incendiary bomb using bats.
OK I watch way to much History Channel (but the weird weapons of WWII shows are pretty interesting)
OK I watch way to much History Channel (but the weird weapons of WWII shows are pretty interesting)
| QUOTE (Edward) |
| Edit, it let me say fuck????? |
Welcome to the Big Persons'
i just don't see the point of worrying about the ethical treatment of sharks, when we still haven't mastered the ethical treatment of people.
ethical treatment? bah, one might argue that people are overpopulated and we need to cull the herd. 
(and if you're wondering, I'm joking)
(and if you're wondering, I'm joking)
Your argument is moot. The article from the unnamed "British Magazine" isn't true. The US isn't planning on using "stealth sharks".
Come on now, you can't just pop into a thread, say "The BBC is lying to you" and leave without at least linking a source.
it wasn't unnamed. it says several times that the article was in The New Scientist.
Here's a link to the original New Scientist article:
Stealth Sharks
Stealth Sharks
So... do they have Frickin' Lasers on their heads?!?
| QUOTE (Dale) |
| So... do they have Frickin' Lasers on their heads?!? |
No that option is only available on extremely vicious Pike
Who cares about sharks, anyway? They're nasty and vicious. I say we turn 'em all into Sharkpedos! 
No really. I just could not give any less of a damn. They're sharks. IDGARA about what happens to them. When they start using dolphins, then I'll be pissed.
No really. I just could not give any less of a damn. They're sharks. IDGARA about what happens to them. When they start using dolphins, then I'll be pissed.
right. because dolphins would never hurt a living soul.
Screw the PetPro. Don't you remember the dolphin CT assassins that were freed after Katrina hit?
| QUOTE (mfb) |
| i just don't see the point of worrying about the ethical treatment of sharks, when we still haven't mastered the ethical treatment of people. |
I don't want justice. I don't want an end to poverty. I don't want an end to disease, or famine, or hunger. I don't want no fucking commie national health care. I want 1.4 billion a day dumped in the sand and fucking remote control sharks.
U-S-A. U-S-A. U-S-A.
indeed. see above, re: ethical treatment of people.
Man, I wasn't disagreeing with you.
yes you were !!
queer-ass mfb !!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.