World's First Linux Powered Rifle Announced 272
stevew writes "Following up our earlier discussion about whether guns should be self-aware comes the announcement of the world's first Linux-powered rifle. A startup attending CES was showing how their 'Precision Guided Firearms' would use customized, computerized scopes to assist with aiming. 'The Linux-powered scope produces a display that looks something like the heads-up display you'd see sitting in the cockpit of a fighter jet, showing the weapon's compass orientation, cant, and incline. To shoot at something, you first "mark" it using a button near the trigger. Marking a target illuminates it with the tracking scope's built-in laser, and the target gains a pip in the scope's display. When a target is marked, the tracking scope takes into account the range of the target, the ambient temperature and humidity, the age of the barrel, and a whole boatload of other parameters. It quickly reorients the display so the crosshairs in the center accurately show where the round will go.'"
Do Not Want! (Score:0, Insightful)
Rifles are mechanical devices that inflict mechanical damage. I do not ever want that to change and decrease reliability by adding a computing layer in to the mix.
If you want to make the scope into a computing device that's fine. But I don't ever want to pull a trigger and encounter a segfault, or have the rifle fail to operate due to dead batteries, or have it fire unintentionally due to a bug in the code.
Just NO!
Re:Do Not Want! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Thanks for nothing gun nuts (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:So.. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a shrunk-down ballistic computer! (Score:5, Insightful)
RTFA indicates that this is almost identical to the ballistic computer (aka gunsight computer) found in practically any modern MBT or IFV. They've shrunk it down and merged it with a rifle. However, they've once again failed the "Just because we CAN, doesn't mean we SHOULD" question.
I saw this once before: Objective Individual Combat Weapon [wikipedia.org]
It's what taking a $400 M-16 and mating it with a new 25mm grenade launcher, then running it through the Military Industrial Complex gets you: a $800,000 weapon that's too bulky to use, of marginal benefit, and of questionable utility.
Honestly, the Marine Corp and British Marines have a solution that works far better than either the OICW or this new gadget: it's called PRACTICE. I'm willing to bet that putting in a couple of dozen hours at a local shooting range would do the potential buyer of this gadget far more good. Not to mention saving them $15k or more. I also seriously doubt this "system" is rugged enough to be used (and abused) in the field for any length of time, even just for hunting. Even by pampered super-rich hunting dilettantes.
Sometimes, technology just gets in the way of getting things done.
Re:Thanks for nothing gun nuts (Score:5, Insightful)
Another case of gun nuts taking useful technology and exploiting it.
Yes. The hacker spirit lives.
We just had them ruin 3D printing. I guess Linux is next?
FYI, 3D printing lower receivers didn't ruin 3D printing. People with your attitude did. "Ahhh! It's a plastic gun! Overreact or it will kill us all!"
Re:It's a shrunk-down ballistic computer! (Score:5, Insightful)
And thus, today, this item makes no practical sense whatsoever.
And saying "well, it will work someday" is exactly how the DoD gets away with blowing vast quantities of money.
I don't think you're familiar with how the development of technology works. We don't get subscriptions from God where he periodically sends us new stuff to use. If we ever want something to be workable then we have to trudge through the entire phase where its not until it works right. With your attitude we wouldn't have cars now because the ones in the 1880's didn't really work well so we shouldn't have spent any time developing the tech.