Gamifying Guns
- Thread starter Robert Rath
- Start date
If you're hunting animals with a rifle, you're already cheating. The animal isn't wearing a protective vest.
If you want 'man vs. nature', take a week off from work and wander naked into the woods someplace and survive for a week. But if you drive to some park in your air conditioned SUV, deck yourself out in modern hunting gear with scopes and GPS and all the fixings, and take down some animal with a brain the size of a box of staples from 200 yards away with a high-powered rifle, you ain't giving nature a chance.
Fashion a bow and arrow out of resources scrounged from the wilderness and I'll hail you as a god walking among men. But I'm just not impressed by something a man can teach his 12 year old son to do between Saturday morning cartoons and lunch at Taco Bell.
That said the computer-assisted rifle is one step closer to a fully automated human-less battlefield and I for one welcome it. The sooner we have robots populating the battlefields instead of humans, the better off we'll all be.
If you want 'man vs. nature', take a week off from work and wander naked into the woods someplace and survive for a week. But if you drive to some park in your air conditioned SUV, deck yourself out in modern hunting gear with scopes and GPS and all the fixings, and take down some animal with a brain the size of a box of staples from 200 yards away with a high-powered rifle, you ain't giving nature a chance.
Fashion a bow and arrow out of resources scrounged from the wilderness and I'll hail you as a god walking among men. But I'm just not impressed by something a man can teach his 12 year old son to do between Saturday morning cartoons and lunch at Taco Bell.
That said the computer-assisted rifle is one step closer to a fully automated human-less battlefield and I for one welcome it. The sooner we have robots populating the battlefields instead of humans, the better off we'll all be.
I can't say I disagree with the first point, the idea of killing as a sport, rather than for sustenance in any way shape or form strikes me as somewhat anachronistically barbaric in a world where we generally have such a great advantage over the local wildlife.itsthesheppy said:
Yes though, if someone found themselves in a position where they HAD to Jason Brody it, I would deem that 100% cool and worthy of praise.
As for human-less battlefields? not going to happen, sure maybe our lovely first world militaries will be replaced with shiny metal gears and the like... that doesn't really do much for the civilians we are vapourising for being in the wrong place at the wrong time in "them terrorist countries".
Even if we could remove the human element entirely from war, I am reminded of the comment (I believe) by Robert E Lee: "It is good that war is so terrible, else we would grow too fond of it", making war more of a game than the CoD and Battlefield games try and sell it as, strikes me as uniquely foolish.
Regardless, the whole idea of the games industry having anything to do with weapon manafacturers I find uniquely terrifying
This is quite scary indeed. I am personally already against fire arms, but I understand why forbidding them now wouldn't work and respect most of the opinions in favor of them. I think we can agree though, that this is very troubling.
Until the robots turn on their masters! Then we're fucked!itsthesheppy said:
I think the only thing standing in the way of war-bots is ethics. No one wants a robot to accidentally kill someone we don't want killed. Even though we do that ourselves already so I don't see the difference. Hell, near the start of the latest war in Afghanistan, an American pilot rocketed the shit of 5 Canadian ground soldiers. Woops! Even though he was told not to shoot. A robot wouldn't have fucked up that bad.
Robots wouldn't have been ordered to take an arseload of amphetamines to keep up with the heavy mission load they were saddled with.rasputin0009 said:
Oh great someone built a real life aimbot. However I don't see the point if the machine dose all the work for you where is the challenge? I'm not a firearms fan but I can see and understand the point of rifle shooting. I live in the UK and despite what Americans think rifles and shotguns are common and I have used them both. The lack of natural predators means humans have to actively keep down wildlife populations and that involves guns, but you don't $17000 rifle to shoot rabbits and pigeons.
I really do hope that company that makes the rifle has setup up the code so it does not lock on to human shaped targets. You could make that a selling point, reduction of hunting accidents would be a good safety feature.
I really do hope that company that makes the rifle has setup up the code so it does not lock on to human shaped targets. You could make that a selling point, reduction of hunting accidents would be a good safety feature.
I must admit, though, if lightweight camera tech was available in the late 80s and early 90s I'd probably have taped a camera to my boarspear for when I was out hunting with my mates.
That is terrifying. Simultaneously the best and worst thing about technology is that it makes everything easier to do.
I'm with you, Robert; I think it's only a matter of time before someone is killed with this, and then the legal hammer will descend.
I'm with you, Robert; I think it's only a matter of time before someone is killed with this, and then the legal hammer will descend.
In the end people don't spend thousands of dollars tricking out their cars because they NEED to get to work as fast as possible every morning or even really to outrun police, even though that was the original reason people wanted to trick out their cars.
Guns aren't much different, they're just expensive and "manly" toys for "manly" men who want to feel manly. So if it's all tricked out like this, people will buy it, regardless of what kind of activities they do with it. Chances are they will just do long-range target shooting with it once in a while. Some may actually hunt with it, but hunting is little more than a game grown men can play with their manly man toys, not really a necessity (although as someone who has had venison, I don't have that much of a problem with it).
It does present and issue of giving anyone a higher capability of making long-range shots that would take years of training and experience to hit before, which is a bit troubling.
Guns aren't much different, they're just expensive and "manly" toys for "manly" men who want to feel manly. So if it's all tricked out like this, people will buy it, regardless of what kind of activities they do with it. Chances are they will just do long-range target shooting with it once in a while. Some may actually hunt with it, but hunting is little more than a game grown men can play with their manly man toys, not really a necessity (although as someone who has had venison, I don't have that much of a problem with it).
It does present and issue of giving anyone a higher capability of making long-range shots that would take years of training and experience to hit before, which is a bit troubling.
It won't, even if someone uses this system to spread twenty police officers thinly over the street their connection to the infrastructure behind it will ensure no consequences end up at the feet of 'the industry' whether it was games or guns that got the blame.Thunderous Cacophony said:
There's a veritable army of lobbyist fighting to ensure the status quo remains intact!
However, I can see these things turning up in Mexico and killing large numbers of people, anyone can be an assassin, just give him an embedded position and one of these, you never have to show your face...
1. Free enterprise so market your product to the people who will buy em.
2. As a former military member almost ALL of the people I worked with were gamers and military people love to buy guns...
3. If you want to say that something COULD be used for not so nice things, and we should not make them because of that. Well we all need to live in mud huts and get rid of EVERYTHING that could be pointy, or dangerous...
4. Before anyone says guns are made to kill people no they are not they are made to send a projectile at a target. The problem is the jackass pulling the trigger that we need to deal with.
2. As a former military member almost ALL of the people I worked with were gamers and military people love to buy guns...
3. If you want to say that something COULD be used for not so nice things, and we should not make them because of that. Well we all need to live in mud huts and get rid of EVERYTHING that could be pointy, or dangerous...
4. Before anyone says guns are made to kill people no they are not they are made to send a projectile at a target. The problem is the jackass pulling the trigger that we need to deal with.
How about we get some equally brilliant minds to develop affordable effective and comfortable bulletproofing, maybe like the Borderlands style shields?
I'm pretty sure once things like the PGF start dropping in price and become available to the world that can't afford $20k guns that I'd like to be bulletproofed 24-7
I'm pretty sure once things like the PGF start dropping in price and become available to the world that can't afford $20k guns that I'd like to be bulletproofed 24-7
This is freaking scary and disturbing. It's gun fetish taken to very unnerving extremes. Gun training is not just about knowing how to shoot, it's also about knowing when and why to shoot. I doubt this company or their program does any of the latter, but it sure does the former. It won't be long before some gun-loving dude with surplus income with no restraint training will accidentally (or not) kill someone. Yay.
I'm pretty sure it would take very little time before someone finds out how to crack and remove that restriction.albino boo said: