[GZG] RE: Space minefields

[Hugh Fisher <laranzu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> Now after rambling on so long, basically my question boils down to. For
> those in the audience who don't like that vision of a minefield (and
> people like Noam who just don't like mines in 3D space fullstop can go
> switch off now), given advances in batteries and distributed sensor nets
> using this node-like behaviour, why can't minefields of the future use
> them to?

From attending a couple of talks, the big thing with
the sensor node communication links is saving the
batteries. Makes sense when you're working with the
budgets given to university science departments, but
I'm not so sure about minefields.

Not only do the military get to spend more money, but
a mine has to carry a huge energy source on board to
be able to damage enemy ships. With the thrusters/
fragmentation explosives/nuclear pumped lasers already
present, there seems to me less need to save on
communications traffic.

Stealth would be a good reason though. Were you
thinking of just activation, or some kind of emergent
behaviour?

On a related matter, I've been jotting down notes for
a computer program tentatively named "FT Swarm" which
would have a human player with one warship against a
horde of tiny (mass 2 to 5) robotic USVs. Would anyone
else find this occasionally interesting, either as the
human captain swatting the metallic swarms, or would
be Skynet programmers designing new algorithms to end
the biological nuisance?

	cheers,
	Hugh
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l