Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

DARPA Chief Outlines Array of Future Projects

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the hope-they-start-printing-money-now dept.

The Military 53

coondoggie writes to tell us that DARPA announced a wide array of new projects in a report to the House Armed Services Committee that they will be funding in the near future. "everything from advanced network and communications implementations to powerful laser and unmanned aircraft development as well as developing techniques to help military personnel survive myriad dangerous situations"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

One of eight (5, Informative)

Raindance (680694) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757866)

The linked article just discusses the 'networking' subset of the report. The full original [darpa.mil] outlines eight primary research areas:

Deny hiding in any environment and cultural background;
  Provide persistent situational awareness and rapid strike;
  Beat the OODA (observe-orient-decide-act) loop of modern adversaries;
  Provide cyber operations dominance;
  Remove the value of using biological weapons;
  Increase survival from life-threatening wounds;
  Restore injured warfighters to the way they were; and
  Develop core technologies that maintain U.S. military superiority.
... and has specific examples of programs within each area. Worth a look-see, particularly since DARPA's one of the few government initiatives that generally gets results.

Re:One of eight (1, Troll)

imasu (1008081) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757898)

Develop core technologies that maintain U.S. military superiority.

"We call this one, 'ImpeacherBot'. Its mission is to save what army we still have."

Re:One of eight (1)

John Boone (1127977) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757996)

Yeah, "The Orient" bit of the loop seems to be pretty hard to beat :\.

Anyway, how about getting an exoskeleton to work? Looks like the golden bullet to me.
Suppose a 50kg exoskeleton can carry 150kg. This leaves 50 kg for a powersource, 50kg for armor (enough to stop .50cal rounds), 20kg of 20mm ammo for a BFG, and 30kg for a long range tank-busting rocket.
Put a top speed of 50 km/h, and tanks become obsolete, plus you can fight in a urban environment without having to call strikes on every standing building.

Re:One of eight (1)

NoisySplatter (847631) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758080)

You might get 50kg of armor to stop a .50 caliber action express pistol round, but it sure is not going to stop a .50 caliber BMG machine gun round.

Re:One of eight (1)

John Boone (1127977) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758136)

Body surface area is approx 2 sq.meters. Suppose it takes 1cm of steel to stop a .50 HMG bullet - then the armor weighs 150 kg. But it doesn't have to be steel, does it - gel would do just as well for a supersonic round, so it could well be some sort of a kevlar-gel composite.

Re:One of eight (1)

NoisySplatter (847631) | more than 6 years ago | (#22760282)

I think you will find it takes significantly more than 1cm of steel to stop .50 bmg rounds. They really are ridiculously powerful rounds.
Evidence Here [youtube.com]

Re:One of eight (1)

John Boone (1127977) | more than 6 years ago | (#22764438)

That's API, not ball, and the plate is plain metal, not armor steel. The point is valid to some degree - API would probably not disintegrate as easily as ball. But I could just as well say - ok, then we make the armor 100kg (metal-ceramic), and carry normal guns, except for one or two squad members who are lightly armored and carry rockets.

Re:One of eight (3, Insightful)

call-me-kenneth (1249496) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758558)

Don't you think it's interesting that for four years, the US and UK military forces in the Iraq sustained a pretty stready rate of casualties whilst the country slowly unraveled around them and a de-facto civil war / ethnic cleansing / religious genocide killed thousands of people, despite all the UAVs, ECM to jam EIDs, superstrong ballistic armour on people and vehicles, digital data and comms that have all contributed to the > $1T cost. Then in the last year or so things have quietened down considerably, due to a combination of layer-8 events - more US boots on the ground, the Sunni revolt against Al Qaeda (Iraq), Muqtada al-Sadr's ceasefire and alleged withdrawal into Iran, tighter border controls in Saudi and Syria reducing the flood of eager young Jihadists, and so on and on. (Of course it can and very likely will go tango uniform again at some point in the next five years, but we'll see.) Anyway, the point is that the gadgets can certainly help win the high-intensity phase of such a conflict, but they don't help with hearts & minds.

Re:One of eight (3, Insightful)

samkass (174571) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758848)

Winning the hearts and minds is completely orthogonal to the technology. Technology won't rescue you from awful strategies or misguided goals. But it still helps save lives, and I'm sure there are a lot of soldiers out there who are glad to be alive and owe it to some of the technology that's come out of DARPA.

Re:One of eight (0)

Original Replica (908688) | more than 6 years ago | (#22760948)

The Iraqi death toll is 1,189,173. [justforeignpolicy.org] The US death toll is around 4,000 (with another 30,000 wounded). [antiwar.com] That's 297 to 1. Which speaks highly of "all the UAVs, ECM to jam EIDs, superstrong ballistic armour on people and vehicles, digital data and comms that have all contributed to the > $1T cost." I'm no fan of the war, or the cost of the war in humans and dollars, but I would gladly have the increased debt than have the 30k wounded be 30k dead. Better still if they had all stayed home, or in Afghanistan. (US death toll 400)

Re:One of eight (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22758738)

OODA? Like bluffing at Poker, and hope the opponent 'falls' for it.
Take IRAQ. We won, sortof. Unfortunately missing, is risk management, voter backlash over our dead bodies, and the hippocket nerve - oil going from $10 bbl to 110bbl. Yeah, success. If OODA worked, it would not have happened. Therefore, an imperfect external influence (politics) stuffs hard won winning logic.

Future projects (-1, Flamebait)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757874)

To kill brown people, I assume.

Re:Future projects (1, Flamebait)

imasu (1008081) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757884)

To be fair, it should be noted that the programs will be effective against foreign OR domestic brown people.

Re:Future projects (1)

BadAnalogyGuy (945258) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757890)

*phew* I was worried they'd lost their focus.

Re:Future projects (0, Redundant)

imasu (1008081) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757922)

Interesting that that was just modded "troll". I'm curious who exactly I was supposed to be trolling with it.

Re:Future projects (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22757958)

Guilty liberals

Re:Future projects (1)

BiggerIsBetter (682164) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758026)

Interesting that that was just modded "troll". I'm curious who exactly I was supposed to be trolling with it.
White people.

Re:Future projects (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22757946)

Brown people
in my country?

It's more likely than you think.

Re:Future projects (1)

NotQuiteReal (608241) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757998)

I defy you to name a "race" that is not as class oriented and xenophobic as another group.

At the end of the day, I'd get along with someone with the same cultural values a lot faster than someone of the same race of a different culture.

It's about the culture, stupid.

Re:Future projects (1)

imasu (1008081) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758480)

I defy you to name a "race" that is not as class oriented and xenophobic as another group.
I don't know, but if we find them, I bet they will be pushovers!

Re:Future projects (1)

turing_m (1030530) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758386)

Just don't make the weapons as idiot-proof, reliable, effective and easy to manufacture as the AK-47, otherwise we won't be the only ones using them.

Re:Future projects (2, Funny)

turing_m (1030530) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758410)

"To be fair, it should be noted that the programs will be effective against foreign OR domestic brown people."

Brown... absorbs heat... hmmm. I haven't RTFA, but I'm picturing some sort of giant magnifying glass. Was I close?

Re:Future projects (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22757886)

Just the ones that need killing!

Just to get it out of the way (1)

sweet_petunias_full_ (1091547) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757888)

In Soviet Russia, bird watches YOU.

Forget that crap (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22757902)

everything from advanced network and communications implementations

Forget that junk. Planes that turn into giant robots are the future of warfare! Practical? No. Expensive? Yes. Useless? Probably. But they're cool, and that's the important thing. And think of the merchandising!

Re:Forget that crap (3, Funny)

Foobar of Borg (690622) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757912)

But they're cool, and that's the important thing. And think of the merchandising!
DARPA the breakfast cereal!
DARPA the toilet paper!
DARPA the flamethrower! (the kids love this one)

keep proper time (2, Interesting)

rice_burners_suck (243660) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757906)

I like the chip-scale atomic clock. In fact, with clock speeds of processors going sky-high nowadays, it would be extremely cool if our computer processors gained an atomic clock. Such a clock would come in very handy to synchronize the events going on within a processor chip containing, say, 1000 cores. I envision the number of cores in processors to increase to many thousands within the next decade, and clock speeds increasing to the terahertz. All of this technology will require an atomic clock to keep proper time.

Re:keep proper time (2, Insightful)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757952)

All of this technology will require an atomic clock to keep proper time.
Erm... why?

Re:keep proper time (2, Insightful)

vertinox (846076) | more than 6 years ago | (#22759068)

Erm... why?

First thing that comes to mind is unbreakable encryption with a one-time pad [wikipedia.org] .

If your devices were never off even by one second, then you could always know what time the other device is set to at all times.

Example... You're in the field and you need to use your laptop to communicate to another officers laptop while still possibly being eavesdropped by the enemy. Each laptop contains the same one time pad for a particular situation that expires after a certain amount of time (FFS you shouldn't be holding strategic level OTP encryption in something that could be captured) that you had received prior to deployment.

Now since both laptops have atomic clocks they could use that as the reference point of which pad to be using at a given moment. Of course the TCP/IP packets will have to time stamp a bit retroactively because of the slight lag delay in transfer of data, but that shouldn't be a problem due to each laptop knowing exactly what the other devices time and hence which one pad it at what time.

Now the OTPs might be rather large depending on the deployment time (like a 1gb text file), but as far as most people can tell the man in the middle attack is impossible to break a OTP as long as no one reuses any of the previous transmissions.

Re:keep proper time (1)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 6 years ago | (#22759844)

Yes, that's interesting and insightful.

  But so far as I know, the grandparent post wasn't talking about laptops separated by any distance, it was talking about multi-core processors. Having an atomic clock on board (afaik) won't make anything more accurate or improve communications. Any sufficiently fast master clock, no matter how it drifts relative to the rest of the world, or how unstable (within some broadly defined limits) it is compared to itself, say, one day ago, will work to coordinate the cores.

      So far as I know, the current state of all very accurate clocks is that they require constant babying, careful cooling, they should not be accelerated, etc. If one could eventually be solid-stated, it would, almost by definition, lose status as an "atomic clock" and simply be an amazingly accurate solid-state clock. Which is fine for your one-time (all-time :) ) encryption scheme. To take true advantage of that accuracy (rather than the current accurate crystal resonators which are so common), you'd have to know where each clock was to the meter, to take into account gravitational potential influences and accelerations (via general relativity), somewhat as the current GPS systems work. Then you kind of lose the whole point of having a mobile computer in the first place.

Not sure why. (2, Insightful)

jd (1658) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758350)

You could move to asychronous processors and eliminate the need to worry about timings issues. Or you could have RAM that worked faster than the CPU cores and interleave the cores. Or you could map 1000 virtual cores onto Nx1000 physical processing elements, and have the hypervisor schedule the vcores such that the I/O bandwidth was always optimal. Or each core could be given so much local L1/L2 that main memory accesses were infrequent enough for conflicts to not arise. Or you could provide each core with local "main memory", a-la the Transputer. There are probably hundreds more solutions to this problem. When the number of ways to implement a system outnumber the number of systems likely to be sold (at least within the next 20 years, anyway), I don't think there'll be a desperate craving for one specific technology.

I'm much more concerned with the fact that chip companies go for what can be made quickly and sold fast, whether or not it's any good. (Hence Intel rushing Itanium into production before it actually worked, Sun adding floating-point very late into the *Sparcs, why multicores never got beyond 4x4s even though single-core processors can go 16-way, why GPUs were so late in the game even though offloading had been mastered decades earlier, why multithreading and deep-pipelining processors were abandoned by Intel, and so on.)

If companies could afford the delay to get things technologically right and then to price them low enough for the market to handle, we'd have seen Moore's Law abandoned by now... for being too conservative. Of course, this isn't realistic. Companies do not have infinite money for research, development, testing and high discounts. And because it's not realistic, it is inevitable that short-cuts will be taken that produce flawed, sub-optimal products, whether or not it's obvious that such products are unnecessary and a distraction.

Re:Not sure why. (1)

rice_burners_suck (243660) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758428)

I can imagine that a company like Intel should be able to produce the things they can make now and sell fast, while simultaneously building things that have been mastered already (you gave the example of offloading) into new technologies, things they plan on introducing later in the game. It would be extremely important to keep these developments totally under wraps (the way Apple keeps things secret until the moment they are ready for announcement). This type of business planning would allow a company like Intel to make the slow, gradual improvements to their core product for several years, compete with its rivals, and basically appear to be playing the same old game, and then all of a sudden, introduce something revolutionary (something that appears revolutionary but is actually well tested with years of R&D behind it) that just blows its rivals out of the water because they have no way to compete with such a product. If Intel suddenly comes out with a "kilocore" processor that can be installed in laptops and run software ten times more bloated than Windows Vista running Emacs, but run it without breaking a sweat, well, then I'd say it would place them in such a position of prestige and superiority that no other company would be able to compete for years.

Re:keep proper time (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 6 years ago | (#22760638)

All of this technology will require an atomic clock to keep proper time.

Not really. The problem of distributing the clock signal between the multiple cores and keeping it in sync is far more critical than actually keeping them on an accurate time. In fact, the cores probably don't care whether or not the clock frequency drifts a few percent, so long as they all stay in step.

What an atomic clock buys you is the ability to synchronize communications between various remote platforms. Or to provide an accurate time base between them for functions like encryption or triangulation without having to establish it via a comm. link.

He forgot to mention... (2, Funny)

uxbn_kuribo (1146975) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757908)

Where is the DARPA Chief's pet project, Code Name... Metal Gear?

Oh! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22757964)

Myriad dangerous situations. I always knew that situations that endangered myriads were bad.

Well... (1)

espiesp (1251084) | more than 6 years ago | (#22757970)

As an avid non-reader of the actual article I must say that this snippet is rather disappointing. I fully expected armor suits at the very least.

Re:Well... (1)

BiggerIsBetter (682164) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758042)

As an avid non-reader of the actual article I must say that this snippet is rather disappointing. I fully expected armor suits at the very least.
Armored suits? I was expecting armored polar bears.

Re:Well... (1)

espiesp (1251084) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758092)

Had I said Mobile Suit as intended, it may have made more sense. But nothing makes more sense than armored polar bears.

Re:Well... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22759914)

Like this?

http://www.americanagility.com/ [americanagility.com]

Riiiight (-1, Troll)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758196)

developing techniques to help military personnel survive myriad dangerous situations


How about taking those Senators, or whores depending on who you talk too, and putting them in the same level of danger. I think this technique would be quite useful for making sure our military over seas actually gets the equipment it needs to survive the myriad of dangerous situations they face.

IMO, the most dangerous situation our military faces is the corruption in our government which gives billions to private armies while simultaneously depriving our soldiers of simple bulletproof vests.

I do love hearing about the Land Warrior program, and all the high tech goodness coming from Darpa and the Military Industrial Complex. It is certainly some very cool stuff, it's just that I have to wonder whether or not it will actually reach the field due to funding issues.

Re:Riiiight (0, Troll)

master_p (608214) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758752)

How about taking your armies and navies and restrict them to US space, allowing them to exist only for defensive purposes?

For a nerdy, tech-loving toy freak... (1)

hyades1 (1149581) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758268)

...is there a better place on Earth to work than DARPA? I always thought it would be SO cool to go to work every day and look down a list of fantastic toys that people are willing to spend giga-bucks on, and maybe get a chance to decide which ones get built.

Re:For a nerdy, tech-loving toy freak... (4, Interesting)

smilindog2000 (907665) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758546)

AFAIK, DARPA just funds research projects. People who actually work for DARPA are mostly government administrators. You have to be careful, though. DARPA isn't suppose to fund projects that directly result in any actual products for the military. It's suppose to be far-future advanced research. I was once raked over the coals for pushing for actual commercialization of a DARPA funded project (cheap, reliable, rad-hard-by-design chips). Personally, I prefer to stay clear of DARPA, and instead work on projects funded to actually build something useful for today's military. It might sound fun on slashdot, but I've found DARPA work highly frustrating... but I like building real systems, so it's a matter of preference. With research, you can change the rules at the end and declare success... it's often very political. With real systems, the proof is in the product. There's no faking your way around it.

Re:For a nerdy, tech-loving toy freak... (1)

samkass (174571) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758884)

The end goal of every DARPA project is a final report. Thus, every DARPA project ends in "success" as long as someone writes the thing. That being said, in the final stages of most DARPA projects things usually come down to Earth and everyone starts considering what short-term benefits an actual program might see from it.

Our DARPA project, by the way, was fielded and transitioned to a program office (CPOF). So it can happen.

Re:For a nerdy, tech-loving toy freak... (2, Insightful)

Alwin Henseler (640539) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758928)

Like any true geek, I've often admired boy toys coming out of defense research projects (regardless of which country or organization produced them), for the technical feat or wow-factor. BUT...

At the same time it saddens me to know that so much effort is channeled into (in a sense, wasted) destroying other human beings. A stealth bomber is a magnificent machine, but it's basically a machine meant to go somewhere, destroy things and/or people, and get away undetected. In history there may be times when it seems necessary to do that (or show the capability), but imagine all the good things that could have been done if the budget for its development had been spent elsewhere (like in medical research).

Mankind has developed weapons that fit into a truck, and can kill 100.000 humans in minutes, but at the same time a significant portion of people on this planet doesn't have enough/clean drinking water, even though 2/3 of our planet is covered with water (and it's easy to separate water and salt). We do have a bomb that you can fire with a gun from miles away, and that will steer itself in mid-air using satellite-provided timing signals, to destroy a target much more accurately than before. Yet we still don't have a cheap way to produce solar cells, even though the basic compound is among the most common materials on the planet.

I have no doubt that if you would take any large country's defense budget and spend it on third world economic/technological development, cancer, malaria research or similar, much more human suffering would be prevented than the few terrorists stopped or soldiers saved in wars on foreign soil. Can mankind do it? It looks like not, which is sad knowing that we've wandered around this planet for many thousands of years.

This is probably the #1 reason I would never work on anything high tech, if it has *primarily* a military purpose. In that context, I'd consider sitting around, doing nothing and eating out of my nose a more productive way to spend my time.

Re:For a nerdy, tech-loving toy freak... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22759412)

I have no doubt that if you would take any large country's defense budget and spend it on third world economic/technological development, cancer, malaria research or similar, much more human suffering would be prevented than the few terrorists stopped or soldiers saved in wars on foreign soil. Can mankind do it? It looks like not, which is sad knowing that we've wandered around this planet for many thousands of years.


The welfare of the third world is not my concern. If the investment in technology saves 100 of my compatriots as opposed to 10,000 of the opposition, so be it. I share a certain degree of culture with the other citizens here, which means that my bonds to them are stronger, which in turn means that their welfare is more important to me than the welfare of (insert third-world country here). Some call it nationalism. Some call it xenophobia. Some might even call it myopic. I call it reality, and since people like me are in the majority, you're going to have to deal with it.

This is probably the #1 reason I would never work on anything high tech, if it has *primarily* a military purpose. In that context, I'd consider sitting around, doing nothing and eating out of my nose a more productive way to spend my time.


Not that you'd ever be asked.

Do we need to stop invading other nations for absolutely no reason? You bet. We should have never invaded Iraq (and thank you Joint Forces Command, you just verified what we all knew), but we should have been in Afghanistan with 150k pairs of boots on the ground. We should have never used warlords or mercenaries at Tora Bora; we should have used US-only military assets.

My point: there will always be situations in which the military is required, and when they go in they need the best equipment and technology that we can muster. No matter what you give to the third world, there will always be some who resent us and will take a shot if given the opportunity.

Les Enfants Terribles all over again (1)

absoluteflatness (913952) | more than 6 years ago | (#22758294)

DARPA Chief Outlines Array of Future Projects
Just make sure it's not one of those fake DARPA Chiefs who'll go an have a "heart attack" right at the beginning of the game...

Also, remember: Meryl's CODEC frequency is on the back of the disc case.

metal gear solid (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22759138)

DARPA chief, as in metal gear solid's DARPA chief?

efficacy (2, Interesting)

theminionofgozer (1160501) | more than 6 years ago | (#22759614)

Please let me know if I'm wrong here, but it seems that as exciting as it might seem to have Darpa working on all this "neat stuff", the reality is its really just a highly inefficient way to stimulate the economy. After all, the real goal of theses projects is simply to inject federal (the publics money) spending into congressional districts and funnel it into private hands, ie. job creation, etc to stimulate the local economies of every congressional district. Unfortunately, there's a tremendous amount of waste and graft. Ultimately this R&D should also lead to advanced consumer products, and it does work that way sometimes, but by and large, its mostly inefficient. It's socialism, but a highly convoluted and inhumane socialism. For example, instead of giving our low skilled under-educated citizens jobs being productive, we remove them from the job market usually by shipping them over seas where they're paid a very low wage to remain under-educated and unproductive. Ironicly, the military industrial complex that helped get us out of the great depression, is about to send us back into another one.

Wow ... everything is faster than fast, bigger ... (1)

OldHawk777 (19923) | more than 6 years ago | (#22760352)

Communications/ISec, Soldiers, Health, Logistics, Command & Control, S2/G2 collection the complete battle field environment is going SF/XF. I wounder, how will the home-front keep up with such an exceptionally high-speed, fast consumption ... USA DoD Military? Well, the world best watch-out now if they are supporting terrorist and enemy combatants.

Dang, I hope the "Office/Industry Environment" is being improved equally, because if you can't keep the innovation and logistics flow up to speed ... someone may run out of bullets or bombs, maybe even food or fuel, then again maybe the virtual collaborative (SL/Twitter/Miro...) academic/office/industry mission and development environment will just happen as needed (not planned).

SL with Avatar Populated Environment/Experience Simulation/Synergy (APES) would be a good tool for low/average bandwidth collaboration over distances for training, research, development ....

SL/APES would be better than putting all the prized eggheads/geeks at a single target spot or a meeting.... "Together we die" is being done with many DoD assets being consolidated at various locations (no WWII lessons learned) ... I wounder what has been and will be started/setup/moved into the Washington DC area? I wounder, could China/Russia/Iran/North Korea ... Terrorist accidentally win a war or great victory by attacking the small packed region of Maryland and North Virgina.

Some real dumb things have been done in the USA over the past decade, on the foolish assumption that the USA will never be attacked ..., even after being attacked twice in NYC ... I am not surprised our borders are still not secure with idiots making totally clueless plans based on politics and vapor-power. Some stuff has been done right, but most for the past ten years has been a royal SNAFU, begging for no one to notice and fear-voting (more will start after the conventions).

DARPA is more than research and reports (1)

Petronius Arbiter (548328) | more than 6 years ago | (#22760556)

DARPA has dozens of projects and various different management styles in the several offices.

Nevertheless, the comments about DARPA being about only research and producing a final report are completely at variance with my personal experience with DARPA. In contrast, I like to joke that, under Tether, DARPA is not about research at all. It's more about engineering and assembling existing pieces of research into a working prototype. The Grand Challenge is an excellent example of this. The ultimate success metric is that some part of DoD picks up the work and transitions it into a deployed product.

DARPA staff don't do the research/engineering themselves. They travel the country to search for the leaders in the field, whether university or industry, and pay them. Typically those have 18 months to show preliminary results, or the funding is stopped.

Slashdot readers who think they have a crazy idea that could benefit defence should consider sending a DARPA program manager an 8 page white paper summarizing their idea. It's really exciting working with such intelligent people.

Research Project (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 6 years ago | (#22760662)

developing techniques to help military personnel survive myriad dangerous situations

How about: Don't put them in the middle of every civil war or unstable regime that's none of our business in the first place.

Now, where's my grant money?

Huh? What was that noise? (1)

brendank310 (915634) | more than 6 years ago | (#22760882)

Where is Donald Anderson?
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?