/k/ - Weapons

In our lifetime, it's just a joke

Until they solve the power requirement, which won't be anytime soon, it's most assuredly a meme. If we do get the technology, whether or not it's a meme is going to depend how much more destructive man-portable weapons have become compared to how far materials science has advanced. In general, weapons development tends to outpace armor/defense development very quickly, and while that gap has closed a bit for infantry only, nothing on a larger scale in the past couple years, chances are that trend will remain the same over time. In which case, the juice won't be worth the squeeze for power armor and it will see limited use in all but the most niche scenarios. If the trend bucks and defensive tech kept better pace with offensive tech, it might see some use in certain circumstances and with certain troops, although the expense would likely mean it's not worth it for general infantry.

In the distant future it might work but for now the closest we can feasibly get while still reaching for the stars is an exoskeleton.

>>626754

This, until we can get something that is basically a sci-fi miniaturised (in both volume and weight) powerplant they are going to be limited to use as very restricted loading/construction exoskeletons. It might not make a soldier immune to small arms and most AT weapons, but having a worker lift things weighing half a ton all day long without breaking a sweat is still kind of impressive.

>Fingerless gloves

This is why you shouldn't take the American military serious anymore.

>>626750

>slips in mud

>>626755

Nah, power armor encourages a move up to 20mm autocanno fire, and using 40mm HEAT against to smallest units.

>>626804

>The cost of fielding AP ammo vs the cost of armor would make it essentially useless

Depends on armor strength. For example your picture. Lowests end of Space Marine Armor puts at vulnerable to standard HE Bolter fire. Which is silly. Highest end of bog standard(where did that term come from? whatever) puts it at resistant against explosives significantly more powerful, with the thickest bits resistant against RPG7 and 100mm recoiless rifles and only the most vulnerable parts vulnerable to 20mm AP.

But even just all around resistance to 20mm API means something very fucking relevant, it means extreme resistance to FRAGMENTATION damage. When you are forced to use RPG7 and above in the direct fire context against an enemy soldier to guarantee a casualty, not a kill, a casualty, then that soldier is likely IMMUNE to area of effect fragmentation and indirect high explosive fire from anything smaller than 155mm artillery. They might even survive being thrown around by it from a close boom.

So even if if the armor in question is only all around immune to 7.62x54r API, that also by default increases survivability against explosives.Immunity to .50cal straight up means you can ignore frag grenades tossed into your immediate area.

>>626809

>fucking AT rifle to the battlefield already means winning.

Heavy Machine Guns and anti tank weaponry is already standard fare for insurgencies, along with bigass IEDs. Thanks, Soviet Russia.

>>626754

What if they just use power armor to field more powerful weapons?

>>626818

Definitely a possibility, but it's still a question of cost benefit analysis. PA is going to be fuckall expensive.

>>626750

Wouldn't they be vulnerable to artillery fire?

>>626823

Conventional artillery produces tiny fragments, think steel toothpicks, they'll shread unarmored vehicles, infantry, and even armored vehicles if they're close enough to the blast, as the fragments are still moving at a higher velocity. Anything armored that can take a 20mm can shrug off anything but a very near Miss or direct hit. Nice compared to the 150meter radius kill zone for a modern 155mm frag shell.

What will probably happen is a change in shell design to incorporate larger fragments, or purpose built projectiles, tungsten balls/flechettes. It will lower the killzone but increase armor lethality.

Maybe more exoskeleton type stuff. Getting a dude in a mechanical frame that can carry a ton of weight is a fine way to load him up with thicker heavy duty armor, probably a decently big gun too if the suit has some sort of stabilization thing going on.

The biggest challenges would be the power supply, making the wearer/pilot doesn't overheat or otherwise be at risk from the suit's function, designing the actual suit to be good armor (I don't think making thicker plate would work here), and of course the helmet. Last one is actually a pretty big one, a few ways around it from just leaving it as the weak link with a glass or other transparent visor to look out of it to adding a camera and screen to it. VR can potentially help with this, maybe even giving the user wider field of vision. Though that has the problem of power consumption and sensitive electronics which might be damaged by gunfire.

Another problem is just space. Like a dude's legs are only so wide apart, you can't really armor the inside that much without making movement a pain. Plus each suit would need to be adjustable or custom to one user.

So it's plausible, not really practical but it could be done given some work.

More realistically I'd figure we'll get mechs first. Not the bipedal ones, as great as it sounds to have a walking mech wheels or treads are usually fine. So really they'd basically be a tank with arms instead of a cannon, smaller ones but still they could have more versatile applications, carry some good guns, and still have the finesse for fine tasks. I'm not sure how useful this would be, but on the engineering side it's easier.

>>626834

Wow I didn't know about them actually existing. Does this mean I was born to be an engineer?

why though? a human is a very good general shape but its almost never the best shape for any particular purpose

power armor is basically just makeing a human shaped tank, but a tank shaped tank is much more efficent

for the same reason we wont see mechas, a jet shaped jet is better then a human shaped jet

Wouldn't it be easier to just use drones if the problem with energy source was solved? They can fly, carry stuff just as well, do not eat, sleep or even breathe, thus making chemical or biological weapons less useful instead of relying on some pacts and treaties. They can even be automated and emp shielded if situation so requires. The only problem with that would be a threat to bystanders but it's largely a non-issue with military applications. Where these suits would be useful is in localized conflicts where creating fortifications or mass destruction would be cumbersome, like protection, infiltration, urban warfare, police functions, home defense, basically anything that might find use for a serious cover that you carry with yourself but using an automated machine is dangerous or ineffective.

>>626809

>forcing the enemy to carry a fucking AT rifle to the battlefield already means winning

Unless the guy 'carrying' them is wearing or more likely driving a powered exoskeleton which happily takes the weight of two 40mm auto-cannons (which seem a better bet than AT rifles) and a 2-300 rounds of HESH or APHE rounds, and maybe the electronics needed to computerise the fire control, give the auto-cannons a decent range of motion and tracking speed and they can engage targets about as fast as the soldier can designate them.

>But that's completely impractical!

Yes, but as we're talking about something that would still be sci-fi 50 odd years from now I don't think that's a problem.

>Dude, it's still retarded!

and when has that ever stopped a military purchasing decision?

>>626808

Are you the same gook who advocated for the use of “power swords”?

>>626849

Oh yeah, you are entirely correct there. Until powered armour is as cheap as modern kevlar it will be impossible or maybe just retarded. You might be able to use it as specialist kit for very carefully chosen and trained units in about 50 years, but until then it's just a sci-fi fantasy. I do rather enjoy indulging n sci-fi fantasies though. Although when it gets to the point I described in >>626848 there's not much point in leaving the human in the system (with any luck by then the senior staff officers will have cooled the fuck down when it comes to automation in warfare).

>>626841

>power armor is basically just makeing a human shaped tank,

A human shaped tank that can fit through doorways, climb stairs, etc. Something a tank shaped tank can't really do. And of course, tanks are (more or less)limited to fixed weaponry, whereas a dude in power armor can just put down whatever he's carrying and pick up something else.

Power armor isn't replacement for tanks, it's replacement for special forces infantry. At least, assuming suitable power sources can be developed.

Won't happen until batteries get small enough. Wearing massive steel plates won't happen any time soon, but polymers are only getting more advanced by the day and plastic armor has a lot of potential.

>>626809

You don't need an AT rifle to penetrate any kind of armor a person could wear.

Modern full body armor is 20lb, and it leaves about 60% of the body unprotected. Any kind of full protection would weigh 50lb, plus equipment and uniform being around 30lb, and pack being 50lb. Meaning a powered suit is still going to offer protection against 7.62AP at best. At which point enemy just goes up a caliber, any kind of normal sniper or general purpose machine gun would have a decent chance of going through.

And that's not even taking about frag grenades, rifle grenades or underbarrel HEAT shells that are available readily everywhere, or shit like flechettes which go clean through armor and don't weigh any more than regular rounds.

Using this powered suit to carry armor is retarded.

>>626813

>RPG7 not a threat

Nigger are you serious? The thermobaric warhead would turn the wearer into marmelade.

What would be the validity of using magnetically powered joints for power armour?

Servos are far too unwieldy for this kind of work and are prone to damage, so what if you had a series of magnets form the joints? As an added bonus it might be possible they could become their own dynamos, although I don't know if that would be viable.

>>626841

>power armor is basically just makeing a human shaped tank, but a tank shaped tank is much more efficent

But what if we made a tank shaped human?

>>626888

Why do you think the American diet is what it is? America is always ahead of (and growing out) the curve.

>all this discussion without realizing there will be a convention in the future all countries will abide by in which wars must be fought with energy swords, power armor, and gundams

>>626895

>it is a war crime to paint your battle mechs any combination or single tone of: olive drab, tan, brown, green, grey, or black

>>626895

>>626896

Eat shit fedcucks.

SIEG ZEON

>>626813

Nigger are you retarded? HEAT RPG warhead is specifically designed to punch through tank armor. Human wearable power armor wouldn't stand a chance, if it connects it's game over.

>>626750

joke when done by burgers

total overmatch when done by based Russians.

>>626858

A two-stroke engine is a perfectly suitable power source.

>>626896

>>626895

At that point why not limit all international military action to a televised sporting event held in designated locations around the world

>This Sunday forces of the Russian Federation and European Union will meet in the Jungle Combat Zone on Tetepare Island.

>Both sides have agreed to category 2 combat rules, and a force of no more than 1000 men with 5'000 points worth of equipment, vehicles, and/or support.

>The modifications Russia has made to their Mil MI-32 helicopters, bringing them down to 320 points apiece, will certainly be relevant here, but there has been a lot of discussion lately about the EU dropping so many points into their standard communication gear after that debacle in the Southern Thule combat zone.

>Tune in at 11pm GMT this Sunday to see how that works out for them!

>>626925

Nice dystopian vision, bongistani. I see your eye for how fucked and regulated even warfare could be hasn't lost its touch.

>>626925

Indeed, everything is kind of a sport for the average Brit.

>>626929

>American is terrified of playing a fair game on an even field

Sounds about right.

>>626940

>Indeed, everything is kind of a sport for the average Brit.

But everything is a sport, Magyar.

>Sport: an activity involving effort and skill in which an individual or group competes to determine which of them is superior

>>626956

>war

>fair

>the tribunal shall not be bound by technical rules of evidence

Yep. Typical bleak bong views.

Wasn't the main idea behind power armor/exoskeletons less about providing protection and more about increasing the range and amount of gear of regular infantry?

>>626920

Sounds horrendously expensive, complex and research intensive, so Lockheed already has the patents and invested +100M USD of taxpayers money into development.

>>626962

>main idea behind power armor/exoskeletons less about providing protection and more about increasing the range and amount of gear of regular infantry

More gear?

>>626750

> have potential?

Considering progress of robotics there would be no need to send men into harms way before power armor would become a thing.

>>626973

The Marines' knees will destroy themselves even slower, so you have to compensate.

>>626962

Hasn't there been some research into this meme alloy that grows back together when separated?

Body armor that can repair itself in the field should be of some interest to western CY+3 militaries assuming it costs a fortune to develop, produce and maintain.

>>626957

>Typical bleak bong views

Don't worry, in a few decades/years you'll know exactly what it feels like to have the world taken away from you by some group of idiots who don't know how to run it. At that point you will understand (and most likely adopt) that sort of world view. We may even see an improvement in the quality of American comedy and humour, what can I say - I live in hope.

>>626920

The suit in crisis is described as being worth a billion dollars. Even assuming we could develop that tech in the next 10 years (doubt.jpg), could you reliably assume that one man in such a suit would destroy 1 billion+the cost of training him worth of enemy materiel before getting killed? Seeing as one good air strike will still BTFO this soldier, suit or no suit, it's still far too expensive ot be effectively fielded in general use.

>>626750

If you can make a self-propelled humanoid frame then what's the point of risking soldiers' lives? Sending cheaper more efficient non-humanoid drones with manipulative limbs would make more sense.

>>626973

>>626978

Hahha….ha….yeah. I'm honestly wondering if dropping half the gear that isn't food and ammo, wouldn't make our soldiers MORE effective at this point.

>>626986

>have the world taken away from you by some group of idiots who don't know how to run it.

Because you did *so well*.

>>626995

>Seeing as one good air strike

Artillery strike or IED would be more like. Also if anything, Crysis downplayed how devastating the suit's capabilities would be in several respects. And downplayed what all such a suit would or could do.

Also, at a billion dollars that puts into the realm of the B2 Spirits…25 years later, F35's have radar signatures 99% as small. But since Crysis decided to copy Halo and a few other scifis, with a 3rd faction of doom, and copy Resistance:Fall of Man by making that 3rd faction so outrageously powerful that it is simply unbeleivable for them to be beaten, we didn't get to see anything neat after the 1st game.

>>627022

>Because you did *so well*

Caused less damage in centuries than you guys manage on an average Thursday afternoon.

>>626871

Nigger, if you use thermobaric warhead, I don't see normal infantry is gonna fair better.

>>626870

>At which point enemy just goes up a caliber, any kind of normal sniper or general purpose machine gun would have a decent chance of going through.

At that point you win by forcing the enemy to once up their own weapon.

>Using this powered suit to carry armor is retarded.

Powered suit is to carry weapons, armor is just there to protect the wearer.

>>627071

>start the Hundred Years' War because the butthurt Plantagenets wanted to steal the crown from the rightful Valois rulers.

>Cromwell. Need I say more?

>give the Jews their main source of financial power

>start wars and be responsible for many Europeans dying because muh balance of power

>wreck China's shit, ultimately leading to Mao's rise, because muh free trade

>start wars against the Boers because muh South African dominion that nobody wanted

>enslave and oppress the Quebecois, our brothers Francophone, simply because they were French

>attacked Germany, the greatest civilization on Earth, twice, in the first half of the twentieth century, while letting others bleed for it

The Americans are slaves to Pissrael, sure, but you've allowed them to exist, Anglonigger.

>>627020

>half the gear that isn't food and ammo, wouldn't make our soldiers MORE effective at this point.

You'd have to redesign everything from the ground-up to save the muhreens' knees, from the last bit of the equipment to the very doctrine of how infantry should be deployed. Currently there isn't a clear idea, so they just keep developing and adding new equipment. Actually, that has been the situation since at least Vietnam. For example, why should the average grunt carry food if he is part of a completely mechanized army, and isn't part of a light infantry formation? And even if he had to carry food, why should he carry it into a firefight when he could just pull 50-100kg of food on that thing >>626785 and leave it behind at a temporal depot?

>>627097

It makes a lot more sense when you realize the US army in general is primarily to make money, not making sense, which explains Shock & Awe.

Of course, all the generals exist just for the bureaucrat to funnel into more money and bribery.

>>627100

Danke schoen, my good friend Allemagne.

>>627098

> US army in general is primarily to make money

They're not making money for anyone except defense contractors, which is why washington DC's suburbs are the richest in the US. literally, richest counties in the US. you foreign propaganda types should be hammering that point.

> Of course, all the generals exist just for the bureaucrat to funnel into more money and bribery.

Lol yeah you Chi-Com types would know, asian corruption is an art form. at this point i bet 50% of PLA generals have a house in vancouver

>>627122

Possibly. I think another important problem was Moltke the Elder refusing to listen to Bismarck on how to wage the war. Moltke wanted total war, to fuck over us, while Bismarck wanted a more limited war, because he was a genius who was completely right.

The power supply is the biggest issue. Genetically enhancing soldiers to make them stronger would be more practical.

>>627245

Well, in the case of Rhodesia we were definitely in the wrong. The Boers I've covered above. As for South Africa they had a perfectly peaceful and civilised exit from The Empire that ran from the South Africa Act of 1909 to The Statute of Westminster in 1931.

>>627242

><100 years war, AKA the first British War For Independence

>British

>WE WILL HAVE TO REFUSE TO UPHOLD OUR TREATIES WITH THEM AND THEN ACT LIKE IT'S THEIR FAULT!

Like the surrender of Maine?

>>Boers rebel against the legitimate authority that protects them, rebels get fucked.

<Brits immigrate to Orange free state like niggers and outgrow Dutch settlers while taking their gold and diamonds

<dindu nuffin was self defence, half a million British soldiers were just self defending from dem 50 thousand Boers

>>You're right, we should have wiped them out. I think most modern Canadians would be very grateful for that. Even in the best of cases sometimes mercy misleads the hand of righteousness.

I don’t mind have frogs here, in fact I think we should learn French in school as a mandatory second language, but they need to be put in their place and Quebec is a whiney cunthole full of whiney pseudo-Jews who cry separation everytime they want another few million. If they acted like they actually cared about the nation (well Canada isn’t a nation but a country) and decided to do something besides suck money from everywhere then I’d be a-okay with them. But that’s not your fault it’s our government’s fault for being run by weak faggots for the past 50+ years.

>>Firstly, you're welcome for us bailing you out and ensuring your independence

G-d bless you for saving French democracy, otherwise they might have purged the commies and Jews. What a terrible scenario! This truly is the best timeline where the valiant Brits saved the world from gnatsees and created Israel. I only wish such sneaky deeds like the Suez crisis or terrible acts like colonization were never orchestrated by your righteous government. Thank you England and G-d save our Queen!

>>627251

>the treatment/handling of colonials entities of the brits is THE reason why Africa is so shit nowadays

Those countries were working just fine under British rule, and they were working just fine when they left the Empire. If things have gone to shit since then it can't be our fault, they agreed to remove our responsibility for them by setting up their own independent governments.

India will shit in their power armour

>>627278

>Guided evolution is the future.

Nah, artificial intelligence and visualization of consciousness are the future. The flesh is weak, the machine is strong! So basically Gigga Nigga Terminator Prime, shining as bright as the energy of multiple consumed stars and dying systems

>>627282

>The flesh is weak, the Machine is strong!*

fuck

>>627284

>not fitting microwave weaponry to an RWDS suit for the purpose of frying commies' brains with Mein Kampf audiobooks

>not inventing propellers capable of acting as loudspeakers at supersonic speeds, then committing mass murder by blasting Erika or the Fallschirmjägerlied at 300db all over enemy airspace

>>627282

> artificial intelligence

Sorry,m8. Digital machines can never achieve sentience. They can roughly ape intelligence via problem solving algorithms, but that'sit. They can never really think. Machines are tools, they were meant to be wielded by us, not replace us. Not to mention the human body can outlast pretty much any machine. Can you think of any machine that can run for over 90 years without replacement parts? Plus the human brain still out classes modern supercomputers that use enough energy to run a small town. Why waste time with an inferior platform instead of building off an already far superior design? Fucking hell, even out muscle fibers are more efficient than most mechanical devices when it comes to converting chemical energy to work. Fuck starting over from scratch when we have a great platform to work with.

>>627282

Ave Animus Ferrum!

>>627294

>We can't find sentience in humans either.

Yes we can. Sapience can easily be ascertained. Machines don't have it.

>Outclasses in what regard?

Brains are 10000 times more energy efficient than computers and store more data. Even DNA is far better than any digital memory storage.

>The only problem is the platform is a steaming pile of shit. It's so huge pile of unrecognizable random code made out of features that worked during random generation and selection and other features that are build on these ones. It's so fucking huge mess that it's easier not only just create artificial consciousness but create a new lifeform from scratch rather than trying to fix this unholy abomination.

You've outed yourself as another generic programmer autist who knows nothing of the human brain. The human brain doesn't use any form of code since it is an anaolog computer,and analog computer are superior in many aspects to digital computers. Digital computers are good for doing specific tasks, but aren't capable of logic, or cognition. They can crunch numbers really well,but then again hammers pound nails better than fists and nobody wants to replace their hands with hammers. And what would be the point of letting robots supplant us? That's voluntary extinction,the highest form of cuckery.

https://blog.degruyter.com/algorithms-suck-analog-computers-future/

>>627304

>Yes we can

How?

>Brains are 10000 times more energy efficient than computers and store more data

In the current form(remember, only 20 years ago we've thought of a 100gb as big while evolution has been only good at spontaneously creating life, not perfecting it). Machines are still 10000 times more efficient at reliability and precision of the storage of information.

>The human brain doesn't use any form of code since it is an anaolog computer

You've outed yourself as unintelligent fucktard that knows nothing about computing operations.

>analog computer are superior in many aspects to digital computers

Indeed, that's why quantum computers exist. Also, we can go even beyond that and get decentralized nano machine meshnets based on relativistic pattern recognition and visualization, aka our brain but not just with proteins. Or build one system on top of each other and use them for different functions that seamlessly integrate in each other.

>but aren't capable of logic

More like we aren't capable of logic, we can only simulate it by learning similar patterns and recreating them. We count by utilizing our previous memories of numbers during events we previously experienced, unlike digital computers that do it in reverse, using logical basis to describe events from the ground instead of keeping ever fading away mix of images of these events. Ever heard of mathematical logic? Of course not.

>or cognition

You'd have to define cognition first and find it in humans. Define scientifically, i remind you.

>That's voluntary extinction,the highest form of cuckery.

The highest form of cuckery is to degrade your own concept of self to the ugly, weak and pitiful shell your existence has been tied to.

>>627306

>How

I think, therefor I am.

>Also, we can go even beyond that and get decentralized nano machine meshnets based on relativistic pattern recognition and visualization

Dude, you just threw a bunch of scifi buzzwords together to try and sound smart because even you know deep down that this thinking machine bullshit is pure fantasy and you have nothing tangible to offer.

>Mathematical logic

Literally just applying logic to math.

>Define cognition

the mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses. Machines do not have senses.

>The highest form of cuckery is to degrade your own concept of self to the ugly, weak and pitiful shell your existence has been tied to.

You apparently missed the part about guided evolution and improving the species rather than replacing it with something incomprehensibly inferior. Your misanthropy leads me to believe that you're a retarded kike. I understand that this an image board so most people are going to be more into computers than biology, but this is retarded.

>>627310

>I think, therefor I am.

Doesn't work that way, kiddo. You clearly don't think.

>Dude, you just threw a bunch of scifi buzzwords together to try and sound smart

i could explain that if someone else asked but i won't for an illiterate retard like you. Just know that you're too stupid to get this because you're too busy jerking off to human master race. All without knowing that you'd have brain cancer if your body ever actually had a brain.

>because even you know deep down that this thinking machine bullshit is pure fantasy

Keep projecting

>Literally just applying logic to math

More like math is pure logic. If you ever finished school you'd know about that.

>the mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses

Nuh uh, you've got to give me something other than your imaginary experiences. A machine can analyze, process and acquire information , it actually does that now under the palm of your hands without you even noticing it.

>Machines do not have senses

They do.

>You apparently missed the part about guided evolution and improving the species

You'll always end up with something inferior because this inferiority is the only trait that differentiates it. You are clinging to using steam in the era of nuclear reactors because this if the only thing your pitiful ego can relate to.

>with something incomprehensibly inferior

What really is incomprehensibly inferior is your joke of a mind that is unable to grasp anything beyond this existential autofellatio of a philosophy.

>be more into computers than biology

That's not even about computers or biology. There's nothing wrong with biological computersaside from being inferior to nanotechnologies, it's you reject anything that interferes with the identity you tie to an archaic piece of history with only thing that makes it special is its own inferior engineering solutions and inefficiency.

>>627314

I'm actually for that, aside from the thing that makes organics special being that they are carbon based.

>>626750

>Is power armor a vidya joke or does it actually have potential?

Yes. Geometry says it's fucknig retarded. You can't put a ball joint inside of another ball joint.

>>627242

>boers

>rebelling against legitimate authority

My god your such a nation of cocksuckers

>>627373

you're*

>>627382

>he doesn’t realize all of American “English” is wrong

They dropped the ‘u’ in words like ‘colour’ and ‘armour’ because it cost less in newspapers to spell ‘color’. So don’t be surprised if in 50 years American English degrades to text spelling.

>>627310

>I think, therefor I am.

>computers don't think

>>627388

>is a clear globalist kike

>calls everyone kikes

Fuck off Germany.

>>627076

>Nigger, if you use thermobaric warhead, I don't see normal infantry is gonna fair better.

So it doesn't do any better than cotton shirt, but lets spend $750,000 per soldier anyway?

>At that point you win by forcing the enemy to once up their own weapon.

No yo don't, because it's cheaper for the enemy to switch to battle rifles than it is for you to field anime characters.

>>627407

>I'm working on a more efficient thermonuclear reactor, your just dicking around with a hamster wheel.

What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I'll have you know I graduated top of my class in the Navy Seals, and I've been involved in numerous secret raids on Al-Quaeda, and I have over 300 confirmed kills. I am trained in gorilla warfare and I'm the top sniper in the entire US armed forces. You are nothing to me but just another target. I will wipe you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of spies across the USA and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that wipes out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You're fucking dead, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can kill you in over seven hundred ways, and that's just with my bare hands. Not only am I extensively trained in unarmed combat, but I have access to the entire arsenal of the United States Marine Corps and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the continent, you little shit. If only you could have known what unholy retribution your little "clever" comment was about to bring down upon you, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn't, you didn't, and now you're paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit fury all over you and you will drown in it. You're fucking dead, kiddo.

>>627407

>Does your calculator think when it does math?

Yes

>Yes it does

No it, doesn't. You have absolutely no proof that you think and many here highly doubt that question.

>read Descartes

>read a book

>Give me an example

CIA listening to you via your phone might help with that.

>No you cant, because we don't have nanomachine computer networks.

<What is scientific progress

>No, math is a subset of logic

And how does that contradict my statement? Math is the purest form of logic applied to the sphere of quantities. There are some other applications that are similarly pure from deviations but they are few and certainly distant from humans.

>Are you actually autistic?

I could ask the same to you. You still didn't provide any proof to the existence of cognition in a human brain, Mr. pile of scripts.

>Give me an example of a sapient machine.

Define sapience.

>Our brains already use nano machines in the form of chemical signals

And there's nothing wrong with that, i never said so. I just said that there's no point in limiting ourselves to carbon based organic nanomachines when we can have all others as well.

>And they can do more

But can they? Can a human brain calculate the angle at which to enter stratosphere? Can a human brain maintain petabytes of historical data about many years past? Can a human brain make precise alterations in a material?

>with 10 wattz of energy than a computer that uses enough energy to power a town

Most things that i described require no more than a simple raspberry pi that consumes many times less, as well as requiring only one unified source of energy - electricity, while humans require so much food, water, air and heat that their maintenance and energy costs go through the roof. That's without mentioning the fact that computers can work without delays and stops for more than just a week with permanent physical damage afterwards.

>Why not build off the already superior platform

Because it's not superior, you degenerate nigger. You've already been pointed out many inferiorities of the system. It's complexity and array of less than optimal engineering decisions make human body almost worthless platform for further progress, given that we can design the same platform using the same principles and even the same materials(however inefficient it may be) and end up with vastly superior results.

>instead of starting from starch using stick and stones

>Modern computing is sticks and stones

>Our brains are already superior to digital computers

>Already

You know that our brains have millions of years in development while(somewhat) modern computers are here for less than a century? if anything the opposite statement would be true - computers are already superior to human brains, though unlike lying bitch like you i'll point out in what regard they are superior - preservation and recreation of precise information, logical analysis and interconnection.

>I'm working on a more efficient thermonuclear reactor

Right now you're working on a digital computer that enables you to spew this senseless bullshit.

>You refer to humans as tools with no consciousness yet you think contemporary computers posses sentience

Not really. I refer to humans as lacking sentience because the statement about it is unfalsifiable and is no different than a set of scripts writing the same thing in a computer, aside from us knowing how computer functions due to simpler and clearer design. All your actions are literally a speculation on our lack of knowledge.

>I'm sorry, but you're not going to be able to transfer your conscious into a robot body and slaughter the chad who ran a train on your oneitis in high school.

Keep projecting, it'll surely strengthen your lack of argumentation. You've provided nothing but a pile of false premises with as much support for them as an average leftist would.

>>626754

It'll be starship troopers, shock troopers in massive armored artificial muscle suits loaded down with man portable nukes and HE.

>>627392

>British

>posts 6 year old meme

>especially in a decade old image macro format

I know that most Brits are actually decent people, but every now and then I meet one that makes me wonder if things would have been better Hitler wasn’t an Angloboo.

>>627445

stop drinking and reading sci-fi bullshit, igor.

>>627445

<What is scientific progress

That doesn't mean it will ever be possible.

>Define sapience

Self awareness, wisdom, the ability of an entity to exercise judgement. Now show me a machine that can do so instead of stalling by telling me to define things that everyone already knows .

>Math is the purest form of logic applied to the sphere of quantities

Is Mechanical engineering the purest form of engineering? Is surgery the purest form of medicine?

>I just said that there's no point in limiting ourselves to carbon based organic nanomachines when we can have all others as well.

Which is retarded because carbon is the only chemical with the properties needed to build nano machines.. Learn chemistry before you larp as someone who knows shit.

>You know that our brains have millions of years in development

Through the chaotic forces of nature rather than under the guidance of intelligent design.

>Because it's not superior, you degenerate nigger.

It is though. Robots can only do specific tasks, and cannot think. They can only do as instructed. Plus the human body is extremely good for killing shit. Modern humans killed and ate rival hominids during the early paleolithic and wiped out most mega fauna.

> as well as requiring only one unified source of energy - electricity, while humans require so much food, water, air and heat that their maintenance and energy costs go through the roof.

A robot cannot sustain itself without a vast modern infrastructure. Pretty hard to get electricity and rare earth metals in nature. Humans can eat nearly anything organic and survive. Which one would fare better if dropped on an alien planet with no outside support?

>Inb4 muh self replicating nanobots will break down raw material in an instant to maintain the robots

Impossible due to thermodynamics. If that was possible then bacteria would be able to decompose fallen trees within moments. Bacteria are basically self replicating nanites.

>Right now you're working on a digital computer that enables you to spew this senseless bullshit.

And? I already said machines are tools, not the end all, be all.

>But can they? Can a human brain calculate the angle at which to enter stratosphere? Can a human brain maintain petabytes of historical data about many years past? Can a human brain make precise alterations in a material?

Did you forget that mathematicians and historians exist?

> You've provided nothing but a pile of false premises with as much support for them as an average leftist would.

Now that's projection. Everything I've propositionedis possible. You're counterarguments are mostly scifi fantasy stuff that may very likely be impossible like sentient AI, nanobot computer networks, Whole brain emulation. Whereas genetic modification, and even biological immortality is entirely possible. We already have genetically modified organisms, and there are a few biologically immortal animals out there. On the other hand some experts are saying that sentient machines are mathematically impossible. At least digital machines.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn25560-sentient-robots-not-possible-if-you-do-the-maths/

>>627459

>That doesn't mean it will ever be possible

We already know nanomachines are possible, i don't see why not use them that way.

>Now show me a machine that can do so

Tay could do all those things.

>Which is retarded because carbon is the only chemical with the properties needed to build nano machines

Carbon isn't everything. Electrical computers, for example, can't achieve computing speeds that optical one can.

>Through the chaotic forces of nature rather than under the guidance of intelligent design.

>guidance of intelligent design

Why not cut out the middleman and apply intelligent design to the thing directly?

>Robots can only do specific tasks, and cannot think

Humans can only do specific tasks and thinking is some magic that you cannot provably describe.

>They can only do as instructed

Not if the instruction can alter itself.

>Plus the human body is extremely good for killing shit

Not really, you lying jew. It's good at using tools but you're nothing without them.

>A robot cannot sustain itself without a vast modern infrastructure

A modern robot. They aren't built for that. You could build a machine that fuels itself by burning everything around that.

>Which one would fare better if dropped on an alien planet with no outside support

You'd still die a painful death few days later, faggot.

>Bacteria are basically self replicating nanites

So what's the problem with making our own bacteria?

>I already said machines are tools, not the end all, be all.

And i already said that humans are tools, not the end of all.

>Did you forget that mathematicians and historians exist?

Did you forget that pattern recognition algorithms exist?

>Everything I've propositionedis possible

And i didn't argue with that, you stupid fuck. It's your propositions about impossible that are the problem.

>You're counterarguments are mostly scifi fantasy stuff that may very likely be impossible

And your counterarguments are mostly claims that humans are the perfect platform to create the ultimate lifeform and no thing should go beyond. All only to support some petty eugenics program.

>Whereas genetic modification

>Genetic modification is the only way to achieve greater form

>biological immortality

Is still limited by constraints of the physical body that can be destroyed.

>some experts

And some neuroscientists think that "cognition" or "free will" is nothing but a mental illusion.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/psych-unseen/201411/the-neuroscience-free-will-and-the-illusion-you

>At least digital machines.

And where did i say about limiting oneself to digital machines?

>>627468

>Tay could do all those things

Nope. She was a good meme, but still a meme. She was basically a parrot repeating things with no thought.

>Carbon isn't everything. Electrical computers, for example, can't achieve computing speeds that optical one can.

This has nothing to do with electrical, or optical computing, just that carbon is the key to nanobots. You're better off using viruses since they're basically natural nanobots.

>You could build a machine that fuels itself by burning everything around that

ATP synthesis is more efficient than combustion. Hence why human muscles are more efficient than car engines. Plus how would a robot burn say… solid wood for electricity? Plus what if there's nothing to burn?

Not really, you lying jew. It's good at using tools but you're nothing without them.

Our hands and nervous system evolved around tool use. Being able to use a wide variety of tools and weapons is are better than having claws, or any built in weapons.It's the reason we usurped the food chain.

>You'd still die a painful death few days later, faggot.

Not with genetically engineered bacteriophages that attack any foreign bacteria

and enhanced immune system, faggot.

>And your counterarguments are mostly claims that humans are the perfect platform to create the ultimate lifeform and no thing should go beyond

Pretty much. I can't think of any rally drastic changes to the human form I'd add.Extra limbs and shit would hinder us more than help. We've dominated this planet with 2 arms, 2 legs, 10 fingers, 10 toes, and 46 chromosomes. Plus I don't want the humanity to separate into different species that'd inevitably go to war due to Gause's law.

>Why not cut out the middleman and apply intelligent design to the thing directly

Didn't I already imply genetic modification?

>Humans can only do specific tasks and thinking is some magic that you cannot provably describe.

Humans can do a plethora of tasks, and I literally defined cognition. Plus you have yet to explain how a machine thinks. How i an abacus self aware?

>Not if the instruction can alter itself.

Can they though?

>So what's the problem with making our own bacteria?

I never said there was, just that they'd be organic, as opposed to metallic because the latter would be physically impossible.

>And i already said that humans are tools, not the end of all.

Humans aren't tools. They weren't created by an intelligent force, and they weren't made for a narrow array of applications.

>Did you forget that pattern recognition algorithms exist?

They don't think.

>Is still limited by constraints of the physical body that can be destroyed.

And robots can't be destroyed?

>Muh readiness potential

From the article

>While it remains possible to adopt any of these stances without being delusional, any position should account for the experiments of Libet and Fried. Of course, as with most scientific data, there is plenty of room to dispute their interpretation. You could say that these studies are simply flawed, citing various methodological problems such as lack of precision in measuring the time of one’s conscious decision – maybe it occurs earlier than the experiments suggest. Or maybe, despite Fried’s findings, the readiness potential isn’t all it’s cracked up to be – after all, it only predicts movement with about 70-80% accuracy

Plus readiness potential is just precognition.

>>627468

>Genetic modification is the only way to achieve greater form

Yes. It's impossible to transfer your mind into a machine. So you can't have a robot body. Well maybe you could do the whole brain in a jar, but putting your brain in something other than a human body for a long period of time will cause it to decay, so that's out of the question. So your only alternative is to build non human robots, voluntarily go extinct, and surrender the cosmos to non humans. How is that ascension?

Are "powered" suits useful outside of frontline combat?

Assuming cold fusion will at some point get un-meme'd an NBC Hazmat suit that could pick up large boulders might have some use in a Fukushima type situation, preferably in combination with robot assistants.

>>627472

>She was basically a parrot repeating things with no thought.

And where did you find thought in humans again, faggot?

>You're better off using viruses since they're basically natural nanobots

Not using, creating and building

>ATP synthesis is more efficient than combustion

So what? It's not like we're planning to build such thing. It's proof of concept, not absolute perfection you keep talking about.

>Plus how would a robot burn say… solid wood for electricity?

In the oven, you fucking kike.

>Plus what if there's nothing to burn?

What is there's nothing to eat?

>Being able to use a wide variety of tools and weapons is are better than having claws, or any built in weapons

that's the point. Being a machine allows compatibility, both physical and informational far beyond any human body could.

>Not with genetically engineered bacteriophages that attack any foreign bacteria

So you're comparing some science fiction to modern robots? What a lying jew.

>I can't think of any rally drastic changes to the human form I'd add.Extra limbs and shit would hinder us more than help

>Literally judging only by the basic appearance

Start with improving already existing tools, they are shit, instead of pretending to grow limbs.

>I don't want the humanity to separate

Humanity is not something monollithic, you globalist kike.

> inevitably go to war due to Gause's law.

>Completely missing the point of the law and interpreting it in the stupidest way.

you apply the law about species out competing each other within an ecosystem and then conclude that there's inevitable war between species. It's not star trek, you fantasizing illiterate faggot.

>Didn't I already imply genetic modification?

CREATE, you stupid nigger, not alter or modify.

>I literally defined cognition

In non-scientific terms. That definition is unfalsifiable and so cannot be used for scientific discussion.

>Plus you have yet to explain how a machine thinks

By processing information. That is thinking.

>How i an abacus self aware?

Strawman, abacus doesn't precess information, it only helps pathetic human brain hold more numbers without forgetting them.

>Can they though?

Update your OS and see.

>because the latter would be physically impossible

Prove it. Some metals are simply superior for things like manipulators, even if they aren't used in processing units.

>They weren't created by an intelligent force

>That's how you define a tool.

>they weren't made for a narrow array of applications

Yes, they were made for a wide array of applications. It doesn't make them not tools.

>They don't think

Only because you play with the term "thinking" by defining it as a self-evident principle that can be subjectively observed. That's not the case. you need to observe it objectively, as we do today, finding mechanisms and predicting human decisions before it recognizes them itself.

>And robots can't be destroyed?

Virtual cognition can be transferred, unlike biological that is tied to the body.

>From the article

>A scientific theory is a theory

>Plus readiness potential is just precognition

Prove it, faggot. That theory is still viable even if not proven.

>>627473

>Yes. It's impossible to transfer your mind into a machine

We don't really know what constitutes "mind" so you've not got stuff to transfer, for starters.

>for a long period of time will cause it to decay,

>implying human body doesn't decay over time

>So your only alternative is to build non human robots, voluntarily go extinct, and surrender the cosmos to non humans

you know that genetic modification can only be bone with unborn species, right? You're not going to get an injection and become giga nigga, only further generations might but you're going to die while watching them live forever. So YOU can't have a new body.

>build non human robots

Fuck you, i hate you more than any robot despite being human, you rotten piece of shit.

>surrender the cosmos to non humans

i don't care about "humans" owning cosmos or whatever. It's not a game with a set goal not do i need to adhere to some globalist standards or identity.

You are so fucking jewish with all that globalist humanism it's beyond disgusting. Go help humanity expand by letting a nigger fuck your wife. He's "human" after all.

>>627454

>>627445

>>627407

Descartes was talking about self awareness, not making calculations. Also self awareness was a good measuring stick for the time period and a massive improvement over thousands of years of knowledge that came before, but we have much better criteria now.

You are all basically retarded, focus on finishing high school.

Also learn how to write and respond to each other in full sentences and paragraphs. Jesus fucking Christ that was hard to follow.

>>627278

>>better metabolism

>birbs can be as smart as apes and cetaceans

>can fucking fly

>can even fucking talk

>butthurt autists still claim that's somehow a downgrade

>>627304

>Sapience can easily be ascertained.

How?

>>627488

The hell did you include me in that link mashup?

>>627494

This is more or less true, bird brain sizes are larger per body weight than dinosaurs. A t-rex had the intelligence of a shark, it just knew what prey looked like, it knew to run toward it, and it knew to open its mouth and chew on it.

Birds evolved from raptors, which were literally the smartest class of dinosaurs.

>>626755

>a person in power armor can be killed with a big enough gun

yeah, no shit.

an AT rifle would fuck up a normal person, too. the advantage the power armor gives is you can carry a shitload more weight for the same mobility, meaning a soldier is less fatigued when he gets to the fight, and can get there with a much bigger gun and/or with a much larger ammunition load.

how power armor is typically depicted is as a hardsuit that can both support its own weight but also move itself, taking all the physical strain off of the wearer. it's not a difficuilt thing to design and implement, the trick is keeping it powered, right now the only options are heavy ass lithium polymer batteries and/or gas generators. neither are exactly convenient in the field.

What advantages would power armor have over tankettes? Somebody upthread mentioned indoors mobility, but to have enough armor to be useful against even .50 BMG, let alone basic anti-armor rockets like the RPG-7, would likely render the suit too heavy to use on staircases or buildings with subfloors.

Could current plutonium battery technologies be used in power armor, or are the shielding requirements just too great?

>>629404

>>629398

Deviating too far from the human form would be blasphemous.

If the average soldier was in better shape (i.e. special-forces-tier fitness level), powered suits would be totally unnecessary. Other alternatives would be performance-enhancing drugs, sportswear (braces to help avoid injury, etc.), more comfortable fucking footwear… If we train and treat our soldiers like professional athletes, each one would be vastly more effective, more capable of carrying armor that protects the entire body, etc.

>>629589

I've also seen the idea of armored bicycles brought up before. Armored electric bicycles, motorcycles, or other powered personal vehicles would be cheaper than all the R&D required to build mechanized body suits. Shit, what about an armored, all-terrain Segway?

>>629589

> If we train and treat our soldiers like professional athletes, each one would be vastly more effective, more capable of carrying armor that protects the entire body.

With the the US military in mind, don't care about making grunt super solders that will need more than a decade to perfect but are happy with a armored truck that will cost them less in the long run.

>>629597

The military wouldn't be necessarily responsible for taking an average dude and turning him into a super soldier. They need to start with a better-than-average dude and invest in him so that he WANTS to improve. They ought to be more selective, with recruiters targeting top college athletes and paying them well. The PFT should be difficult as opposed to the joke it is now. Performance-enhancing drugs should be available (in safe quantities) to those who want them. Maybe have the Army sponsor shooting competitions (not just average marksmanship competitions, but more along the lines of a 3-gun or something else that requires tactical ability AND marksmanship.)

>>629607

Also, along the same lines, they should be targeting the SMART guys too. The average soldier is an idiot.

>>629607

>>629612

Just fucking privatize military or at least part of it and you'll see vast improvements. The only reason not to do that is keeping monopoly, pushing for gun control and hiding the real size of the inefficient bloat the military has become.

>b-but someone will buy them and conquer you!

If you manage to offer great platform for mercenaries to base off they won't be able to hire enough to even have advantage in numbers, as well as finding mercs that are willing to fight against the ones who offer them best conditions to develop and organize and vice versa - you'll find a lot more support for a lot smaller price.

>>629615

>This wouldn't work when operating in conditions their body isn't accustomed to

This is obviously true, but you can't tell me an athlete wouldn't be able to deal with it better than the average dude.

>several hundreds pounds pushing down on the ground in a very small footprint that makes it impossible to use in any slightly difficult terrain

Totally agreed. On a similar note, it's important to remember that the very shape of a human places limits on its strength and maneuverability, so any powered human-shaped suit would suffer from the same limitations. Would a powered suit really be able to make super-strong fingers, for example? Probably not. Yeah, someone could make a purpose-built robotic hand with very strong fingers, but it would be deficient in other ways; it would add a disproportional amount of weight or complexity to the arm, or it would have a lower range of motion, etc.

>ankles

Agreed. Sure, they could add all sorts of plating AROUND the ankle to protect it, at the expense of reduced range of motion or excessive weight or high energy consumption (with the shape and structure of the human body, it requires 4 times the energy to move a pound at the feet as it does a pound on the back.)

I'll say it again: tankettes

>>626750

We need badass power supplies. Either generators or capacitors. Pick one. Crysis could work, if it absorbed energy for literally any electrical source without giving a damn.

>>627097

Nah, collapsible compact hand trucks with offroad wheels would do wonders. As would, um, 6x6 wheeled mules. And not doing patrols like its fucking Vietnam, what the fuck.

>>627209

Muscles too big, ligaments too weak. Stronger joints, ligaments and bones would be better than stronger muscles.

>>629671

>>629670

And yet we and the Russians can make armor plates less than an inch thick that can stop 7.62 NATO Armor piercing rounds cold. Armor material technology has advanced since then.

>>629695

Don't forget about tendons, I tore my ACL. It sucks.

>>629486

We're much more likely to get this from genetic engineering than nanomachines son. Although I'm not sure if the general public are ready to accept military projects that look like they were designed by Dr Moreau, the Marquis de Sade, and Fabius Bile after they all came off their medication.

>>629791

>IQ is correlated positively with education

Because smarter people can make it higher in our education system, not because education gives you IQ. You're born with a preset IQ amount and it can only get degraded, never upgraded.

>>629812

You do need education to get to that level, otherwise you end up with this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genie_(feral_child) The problem is with two assumptions. The first one is that there isn't an inherent "upper limit" of intelligence in every person. The second one is that all people are unable to learn on their own, and so they are complete lost without highly developed formal education. After all, smart people are smart even if they are left to their own devices.

>>629812

>You're born with a preset IQ amount and it can only get degraded, never upgraded

I don't think that is true. I think it's just way easier to lower your IQ rather than raise it.

At an early age, your neurons are making connections between themselves in order to build a functioning neural network. If this isn't encouraged, you'll end up with a brain with a less capable processing power and thus, a less intelligent individual.

I'm not saying that everyone is born equally intelligent, mind you. Since intelligence is based on neural interconnectedness, genes that affect this on a molecular level will probably make differing tiers of intelligence.

I could be wrong though.

Power armor is a joke. You're supposed to put more and more weight on a soldier until his back breaks. Then you throw him in a dumpster somewhere and leave him with a cheap phone filled with his wife or girlfriend getting railed by army niggers. Because diversity yay. :^)

What can a man in power armor do better than a robot that can be sacrificed?

>>629812

>You're born with a preset IQ amount

Not really. You are indeed born with some predisposition of intellect but most of of the shaping of human brain happens during childhood and doing work involving thinking, creativity, etc allows greater potential in the future. You also easier learn things in the childhood due to this - all the connections, skills and dispositions are not seated in your brain as deeply, while older people do have a harder time changing themselves than younger ones. Also, while some "average" IQ in one person can be considered fixed, it does change depending on the person's condition, like if one is really tired, thirsty, sleep-deprived or ill his capability to solve creative problems, understand and learn things and recognize images and shapes, while another person that is given some emotion-dampening, concentration enhancing or even energy-giving stimulant will show greater results. I remember going through internet IQ test at the age of 14 and getting 120 while 4 years later when i was visiting a psychologist and passing a completel survey(with combining pictures, figurines and stuff) i got max result they had - 140. It could be the first test being fake or something but i remember that i mostly started actively learning stuff and getting into philosophy myself from the age of 16 or so. It also feels rather differently to do any kind of mental activity, even going shopping. Sometimes when i haven't slept for 20+ hrs and after walking in brightly lighted halls i couldn't recognize the numbers on the price tags and notice separate products on the shelves despite having good enough sight for that. It might be my issue but i guess it'll work as an example.

As >>629827 pointed out, children that do not learn speech until 3 years will forever remain on the level of a wild animal, sometimes even a specific animal with its habits and behavior.

>>629837

>>629837

>Since when? PASGT was a piece of shit and interceptor even more so, it can't handle half of what it claims.

PASGT was are fragmentation vest an IBA was Lvl-03A with SAPI or ESAPI…get your shit straight, leaf.

>>629827

Like I said, you're born with a certain IQ, and all you can do from that point on is reduce it. In fact pubescence and puberty are two stages of MASS dying of brain cells, they die constructively and actually prepare you for life.

Genie probably was born with a bigger IQ than us but starvation and disease she encountered in the fucking wilderness made the body cannibalize parts of the brain and parts of it died off, and she ended up like that.

It's like pointing to a person who ate lead chips his whole life and saying "wow if he just had education, he'd have been fine!".

>>629828

>I don't think

That's an opinion buddy. What I said isn't my opinion, hell I don't WANT it to be true, it just is.

>At an early age, your neurons are making connections between themselves in order to build a functioning neural network. If this isn't encouraged, you'll end up with a brain with a less capable processing power and thus, a less intelligent individual.

The opposite is the case, both you and >>629847 you fail to understand the connections.

You're basically born with all of your neurons already connected, and your IQ is just the number of connections you're born with. Imagine it like being born with a block of marble or wood, and the size of it being your IQ.

The entire process of learning is actually the CONSTRUCTIVE elimination of certain useless connections. The first burst of this dying off of connections happens in prepubescence, when the general rough shape of you is set by the removal of extraneous junk. The second burst of neuron connections dying happens in puberty, when your final personality is set in stone. As you age, more cells will die, and some will die more than others (leading to small changes in personhood), but mostly it's a gradual random wearing away until you die.

Whereas the process of getting dumber is DESTRUCTIVE elimination of connections at random, which happens when you're starving, frying your brain with alcohol, or have heavy metal poisoning. It's a little like the difference between chiseling a figure out of a marble block, and smashing the marble block with a hammer.

Basically you have to stop thinking of IQ as the quality of "being smart". IQ is the rate at which you learn, not how much you've learned or what you know.

>>629852

>are

>instead of our

What the hell are you trying to say?

>>629853

You seem to misunderstand what IQ is, mr. leaf. It's not a measure of acquired knowledge, which is true because one can know or not know certain fact regardless of IQ, but you're also wrong in that IQ is "amount of neuron connections" or something, as IQ represents first and foremost not some physical characteristic(that'd be measured on the body of the subject, like the density of neurons) but a personal trait named "intelligence" which we measure by doing these strange tests with shapes, pictures and objects.

Now we come to what IQ or, precisely, intelligence that it measures is. Intelligence is our ability to think, learn, make correct decisions and solve problems, as well as recognize patterns and think logically. There are many theories on what impacts or determines it but it is known for sure that intelligence changes over time both negatively and positively, precisely the mean IQ scores of tests at ages 17 and 18 were correlated at r=0.86 with the mean scores of tests at ages five, six, and seven and at r=0.96 with the mean scores of tests at ages 11, 12, and 13. Intelligence also decreases over time in the process of aging later.

On the point of education what you're saying is correct but assigning it to our argument is either a misunderstanding or a strawman. Most impact on intelligence(aside from actual genes) happens before any education takes place - during earlier ages of learning speech, socializing and other interactions with parents and largely suffering from lack thereof(there's also a thing about mother's physical and psychological state impacting child before birth) while public education generally teaches some specific skills that are useful for the children's owners and their further assimilation into the society they've built, though getting used to continuously wasting one's time on unproductive shit is the main one of them today in most places.

>Genie probably was born with a bigger IQ than us but starvation and disease she encountered in the fucking wilderness made the body cannibalize parts of the brain and parts of it died off, and she ended up like that.

More like all activities her brain did were centered around survival as an animal and so shaped her thinking, forming basic structures to rely upon afterwards that way. Mind you, that explanation fits into your theory of "constructive removal of connections", though i think that it's more about re purposing them and neurons determining what connections to use out of all available.

Your comparison is cool and all but doesn't add any meaning to your argument and so you can pick that piece of wood, carve a dildo from it and stick it up your ass.

>>629885

>More like all activities her brain did were centered around survival as an animal and so shaped her thinking

No, she literally starved as a child and experienced the kind of diseases and parasites that civilized people haven't seen for centuries. There is no magic quit engaging in magical thinking.

>>629909

I'm not saying that her activities didn't damage the brain. I'm saying that it wasn't the major factor as has been proven by people getting in the same situation, surviving and being able to properly function. It's not about magic, you stupid fuck.

>>629910

You think intelligence isn't tied to brain structures you stupid fuck.

>>629916

Nice strawman, inbred retard.

>>629980

It's possible to board stations or installations on planets without atmosphere. But powered armor makes no sense for any of that, since the thing you're primarily "armoring" against is vacuum not bullets.

>>630012

Power armor does make sense during planet boarding though(spaceship boarding - just more strength which is still ok but not that important), as different planets have different gravity and so your weak humans accustomed to earth gravity(even hauling what hey haul now) will be unable to move and feel akin to an unprepared Alaskan army coming to Australia. Remember, a human accustomed to moon gravity(or lack of it on a space station) usually has a hard time walking on earth for a while after landing due to this thing so this additional, reliable strength enhancement could be the thing that enables any activity on a hard(and probably livable planet size of Neptune.

>>630076

IIRC, Earth's gravity is high enough to classify humans as heavy worlders. Does anyone have that HFY image describing how much of a challenge we had leaving the atmosphere due to needing ridiculous thrust?

>>630141

These suits were little more than sci-fi prop for propagandists to sperg about though. Just look at that triangles armor fabric. They should also added light blue diode lighting to shine through the gaps of this shit but for some reason they were either too stupid or not idiotic enough for that.

>>630142

>These suits were little more than sci-fi prop for propagandists to sperg about

True, but it looks a lot better than the various exoskeleton prototypes out there at the moment - and as this is a thread about something that probably won't be practical for another 50 years at least a ridiculous sci-fi prop seemed to fit the general theme of the discussion.

>>630145

It literally is just a usual uniform with a fancy camo that has plastic hexagons and triangles thrown all over it. It also has no support for hands so it's not even a complete exoskeleton. STALKER exoskeleton seems to fit general direction, this piece of shit fits avatar 2 Hollywood movie.

Weren't the Japs using exosuit type rigs at Fukushima to allow clean up crews to carry more weight?

>>630096

92% of the planets with liquid water around them are:

1. Mars sized or smaller.

2. Orbiting very close to a red dwarf or a gas giant.

Earth is weird, once you get to earth size, most planets with liquid water are covered with literally thousands of miles of liquid water. It's very rare for an earth sized planet to have any land on it, which makes humans probably some of the toughest terrestrial creatures in the universe.

>>630096

Even if humans are pretty tough with their heavy earth, they might become weaker during flight/live outside on a space station/colony and so not get accustomed to a specific planet's gravity.

>>630171

Whoops, meant for >>630168 too.

>>630171

Yeah but us humans can fly by using our thrusters right?

>>630177

We can but we haven't invented FTL yet so for now it still remains a problem that exoskeletons can partially fix.

>>630284

>does it have what it takes to succeed in battle?

Currently? Almost certainly not. Give it a few years of R&D and it should be pretty decent. The interesting part will be whether they can actually afford to equip every soldier with it - if the final product is anything more than sci-fi looking body armour the cost of electronics could be vast.

>>629411

Yes it's a vidya joke?

Because the first one is molded PVC with written "Give us your shekels goys" in big red letters on them and the second is literally a hobbyist model...

>>630284

I think I've seen that helmet or a least a similar type of "jaw" in test, as part of the tender to replace their heavy helmet type (for entry teams) I guess, but the rest is just plastic to look cool.

It would require a field of some sort.

Similar to that retarded shit the derk girl from MGS2 had.

Like a non newtonian electroagnetizied field to prevent rounds from penetetrating.

Makes more sense than the silly box armor gundam cosplays

we already have powered armor is called a tank or armored car

power suits seem more practical for industrial workers or firemen

>>630168

Geological activity is the key. Moons orbiting gas giants would be a better bet due to tidal forces causing internal heating.

Guys how do I deal with an insatiable lust for black cock? I think I've tried everything please send help

>>626808

>the sex tourist is a larper

Not surprised.

>>626750

>Is power armor a vidya joke or does it actually have potential?

It isn't really the armor part thats difficult, we can craft metal to our will in nearly every degree imaginable + other enhancements. The trouble comes with trying to power this armor, because no man is going to carry 3-4 times his bodyweight in thick steel on his own, it needs to have mechanical support that conforms to his body, the mechanics for that aren't that difficult to design, but again, they require power, more than we can reasonably supply for any extended period of time

>>629404

you can't put a tankette on top of a building without the use of a crane or a helicopter.

someone in an exo suit, with the same armament, could use the stairs.

tanks are useful in open ground due to speed and capacity for thicker armor. in a city, especially one that's currently being fought over, armored vehicles are at a severe disadvantage.

mountainous terrain is also a place where infantry has the advantage. a common tactic of the Afghan fighters is to post up in the mountains, firing on enemy vehicles moving through the restricted mountain roads. due to the very rocky ground the typical doctrine of "close the distance with IFVs then dismount troops within 300m" can't be done, because the vehicles were stuck on the roads. in most fights the average infantryman couldn't even shoot back due to their basic rifle only being useful within 500m. in this situation, a soldier with much thicker armor, and a larger gun, could make all the difference as he COULD cross that aggressive terrain while remaining about as well protected as he would be in an armored car.

It's by no means a game changer, but it's damn useful. especially for soldiers who are assigned to crew served weapons like mortars and heavy machine guns.

>>631241

Seen this http://soldiersystems.net/2018/12/12/diamond-age-forcefield-launches-with-a-discount-for-ssd-readers/

Pretty impressive if true, cost is high but it is something that could augment a plate with for spawl and frag protection.

>>626750

It's theoretically possible – if you devised a system that would actually lift those heavy as fuck metal plates, allowed for unimpeded mobility, and had enough power to last through a prolonged period of time, you would have a walking fortress that the enemy would need an AT-rifle to defeat. Only, a single soldier, however armoured, isn't going to do that much damage on his own (low offensive abilities compared to defensive), the cost of making all that shit (not to mention R&D) would be really high, and in the end, wouldn't it be better, instead of wasting money on a squad of spess muhreens to just build a tank?

>>634390

>ship boarding while encased in a ton of metal

Better hope they don't fall overboard then.

>urban combat

Well, if you got a tank, you can just shell the building rather than cleaning it room by room. It's how they do it in Syria.

Of course, having a power-armoured soldier would be better for certain operations, but it would just be uneconomical

By the time they have the technology to make a suit like that they will just replace all infantry positions with robots.

What benefits does putting a dude in a suit have over making a remote controlled robot that doesn't have to keep a meatbag alive?

>>627392

We just throw your tea out and beat your pussie asses again. I have been to your pussy country. You are weak. This is why you are being replaced with forigners.

>>634915

>We just throw your tea out and beat your pussie asses again.

I know this is just bait but I'm still surprised about how many Americans think they would have won the war of independence without both the assistance from the French and the British Empire severely underestimating how rapidly the rebellion would spiral out of control.

>This is why you are being replaced with forigners.

Americans of all people have no place saying this, the vast majority of you all are mix-breeds.

Polite sage for being off-topic.

>>634323

Generally speaking shoving foreign shit into your body doesn't end well for the body - this is a bit more than just a piercing after all, this is pushing tiny robots into every cell of every organ in your body. In sci-fi they can handwave it away but in RL I'd be shocked if nano-augs weren't completely dependent on at least a lifelong course of immuno-suppressants and probably a few other drugs that were cooked up specifically to deal with the problems it causes that we don't know about yet.

>>635741

Don't forget the Dutch and Spanish assistance they got there (leading to the 'muh taxes' revolutionary congress to tax the colonists who had no representation there to pay back their debt, stay classy America).

>>635784

>Not designing the mechsuit to tear its way through the mountains themselves

>How very Lockheeb of you.

>>634379

It's theoretically possible in the same way that a flight system based on ignited farts is possible.

Line of reasoning:

- Medieval plate armor weighed 60lbs, and didn't cover everything. A full armor of plate covering everything would weigh more, let's say 75lbs.

- Medieval plate armor was about 2mm thick steel on average, AR500 plates are 10-15mm thick on average, lets say 12.5mm. That's 6.25 times thicker.

- 75lb times 6.25 is 468lb

- Average leaf soldier carries 80lb in equipment and weapons, US soldiers ruck over double, lets say our guy will ruck around 200lb in weapons and supplies, since he's going to be using bigger weapons.

- Average for soldiers in body weight is 200lb

- Lets say the exoskeleton, engine and fuel is another 200lb

- Congrats you have over 1000lb thing that's supposedly bipedal, which comes out to 25psi, which is horse tier of ground pressure

If you knew what kind of mobility problems horses had in muddy ground, let alone their ability to use swamps or climb mountains, you'd realize why armored combat suits are plain dumb.

>>635784

This.

>>626750

I can see unarmored exoskeletons becoming a thing for foot patrols or squads that need to carry unusually large amounts of equipment but can't use a hummer or APC for some reason.

I can also see some sort of assault armor meant for room clearing and other short term uses.

But as far as entire armored divisions I just don't think so.

>>635784

A large diameter bike wheel can actually go up and down stairs no problem. Its only tiny wheels that have great difficulty.

>>634323

In both fictional portrayals, it would compromise all the benefits skin has. It would be harden, so the skin will shear instead of flexing. It would block perspiration, exhausting the body. It would also compromises an important part of the immune system, since keeping it sterile would be difficult.

Is there no such thing as passive exoskeletons anon? I thought Ford was giving some of its employees some of these devices, systems that use springs to help assist repeating movements or something.

>>630168

>or a gas giant

So they're moons?

>>627195

Moltke (both the elder and the younger) were followers of the teachings of Clausewiz. Which until this day have been proven right every time someone applied them correctly or incorrectly.

Read "On War" and you will understand that the most humane and economic way to wage a war is to use all available force to make it end as quickly as possible. Clausewitz also predicted the difficulty of using a military force to fight in asymmetric warfare. Moltke the elder knew with certainty that a guerilla war in France would be a bad idea, which was exactly why he didn't want to let Napoleon III go after Sedan.

>>627304

Sapience=/=Sentience

>>637922

It's still entirely true, especially when war can be finished even quicker and the enemy has an even greater numerical advantage. Throwing in as much of your force as possible reduces the difference in power between you and a superior enemy.

Throwing in as much of your force as possible increases the difference in power between you and an inferior enemy. His teachings are universal and hold true well past the nuclear age.

>>637922

>and you didn't have to plan to wage a war against the whole world at the same time.

A plan to wage war against the whole world is a bad plan.

Per Xima and Sun Tzu teaching: you should be well acquainted with your neighbors and gain their support in war.

Your enemy should be isolated and friend-less, which would make the war end quicker.

By fighting against allied country, you risk prolonging the war and losing.

>>626976

This, if you have the ability to move giant plates of metal armor and the battery to sustain it the human inside is just going to be wasted weight. Even if you want a human controlling it you'd be better off doing it remotely in some fancy VR setup to save weight and not risk a human life.

>>635796

> I'd be shocked if nano-augs weren't completely dependent on at least a lifelong course of immuno-suppressants

People talk about what kinds of nanotech would be the easiest. Probably the easiest would be to very slightly modify nonhuman biological systems. We *do* have the tech to fiddle with genes. It's not impossible to get a tomato plant that thrives in salty soil, for example.

If we could have much more precise control over that type of biological modification, we would have "wet nanotech."

We don't have "wet nanotech." We would need to be able to do "wet nanotech" before we could do "dry nanotech." We would want "dry nanotech" to be able to do the fancy impressive stuff, such as real nanomachines worthy of the name. I suspect that "wet nanotech" augs might be friendly to human physiology, but "dry nanotech" augs would require immunosuppression or similar tweaking.

Smart materials (e.g. diamondoid threads) are a reality in the lab but are too expensive to mass produce at present. A practical nano-trooper would probably be a standard trooper wearing diamondoid armor instead of kevlar armor.

The elephant in the room is that we already have super-soldier serum, in the form of amphetamines and steroids. However, Western culture has a massive taboo about drugs. Thus Western countries are not likely to conduct enough experimentation on amphetamines and their derivatives. Thus Western countries will continue to use various stimulants on their troops (e.g. modafinil) without truly understanding the biology.

Thus, even if we got enough nanotech to do nano-augmentation, we would be too ignorant of biology to design the immuno-suppressants that would allow the nano-augs to function.

However, the West could continue to wage the War on Drugs indefinitely. War is profitable for a small number of profiteers.

>>644914

Nice to see that Who killed captain Alex is getting a sequel.

>>644922

Body armor made up of layers of dilatant fluids encased in monoatomic graphene folded over 1000 times when?

>>630168

>92% of the planets

Nigger the universe is so massive that "only" 8% of it could mean there are a Duodecicentillion earths out there.

>>644942

Cerebral deficiency

>>626903

SIEG ZEON

>>626750

Sure, it has potential. Once we've got some insane power miniaturization, anyway.

>>644934

I think Larry Niven wrote some stories about armor with fluid to disperse shock.

Fluid-filled body armor is a practical possibility, but it probably won't work as well as the magic fantasies of Larry Niven.

Cheap graphene would be a tremendous game-changer. Cheap graphene armor would be better than Kevlar even without fluid.

We already have them

https://www.thefirearmblog.com/blog/2019/04/11/metallic-wood-new-material-that-is-as-strong-as-titanium-but-5-times-lighter/

>Although it’s not a new element and basically consists of nickel, it is four to five times lighter than titanium thanks to its unique porous construction which is similar to natural materials such as wood: hence the name Metallic Wood.

>Pikul’s method starts with tiny plastic spheres, a few hundred nanometers in diameter, suspended in water. When the water is slowly evaporated, the spheres settle and stack like cannonballs, providing an orderly, crystalline framework. Using electroplating, the same technique that adds a thin layer of chrome to a hubcap, the researchers then infiltrate the plastic spheres with nickel. Once the nickel is in place, the plastic spheres are dissolved with a solvent, leaving an open network of metallic struts

>The pores make the 70% of the Metallic Wood which makes its density close to that of water. This feature may allow the material to float. Additionally, the pores can be filled with other materials such as energy storing substances. The latter would allow having various devices whose bodies double as batteries. Another potential advantage of this material could be its cost because it is made of relatively cheap nickel. Of course, that would be possible if the manufacturing technology is made cost-effective, too.

>>644922

The problem with any sort of nano tech is you always come up with the same question over and over. "why do I need to implant it when I can just wear it?" If you can make glasses that see in the night why modify eyes to do the same? It's much easier and cheaper to make 1,000 pairs of night vision glasses than it is to perform surgery on 1 guy who may reject it or even go rogue. Nano tech in surgery makes sense, it's a fixed 1 off event that needs to be dealt with, but mass produced nano tech surgeries doesn't. And any sort of super soldier you made is still going to have a critical weakness to bullets, mortars and air strikes like all the rest. Much better to give the grunts equipment so you can switch them in and out while other tech does the heavy lifting. Bomb everything to death and send the grunts to the crater is a much more effective tactic than spending a decade perfecting a super soldier only for the enemy to have left a trip mine that blows his leg off and leaves him crippled.

>>627292

Tay was impressive but it was just a chat bot. For an AI to be similar to a human it would need to be capable of abstract concepts and reasoning, be able to adapt to any task it's presented with, draw from past experiences, combine separate disciplines, etc. AI can perform certain complex tasks, but those complex tasks are always within a limited context. AI doesn't have any comprehension of what an object is, and even if an AI 'trains' for countless instances they can be thrown off by simple changes like snow or film grain in a picture. AI is a long ways away from even mimicking human behavior outside of simple text based interactions, and mimicking is not the same as being equal to.

Until the needs of having heavily armored infantry come theyre just a joke, making tanks is more economical

>>667203

The biggest advantage I see in power armor is actually the ability to have an on board computer system & act as the command and control element for a unit of drones. If each PA wearer is in command of a number of robots using optical links for comms (to prevent EM jammers being an issue), that'd be a great way of retaining local human control while gaining all those nice Terminator advantages. One of the big issues with drones is jammers & latency - having each PA troop acting as a local "Node" in a decentralized automated warfare unit would help to offset that.

That and NBC protection, less damage from small arms & random shrapnel, and the ability to more easily cart around shoulder fired SAM systems - or a Davy Crocket haha.

>>680322

Give each infantryman PA & they can each have heavy missile systems and whatnot, thus achieving your objective.

>>669747

>tfw /tg/ is ruined

>the most creative and fun place on imageboards hasnt made anything worthwile in 5 years

>tfw you have spent 12 years of your life on imageboards

>>680353

the snake snatch thread is pretty interesting and has a plot twist near the end

Honestly, I am having a change of heart.

After playing so many RTS and strategy games, I think the Imperial Guard is the model to follow, so infantry should be numerous and be outfit with the cheapest shit, while money should be spent on mechanization i.e. tanks, IFV and self-loading howiztler.

But I also think that the model where special forces/elite infantries are to be mixed in the regular grunts in order to lead and increase effectiveness for the grunts is better than the model where grunts and elites are separated.

>>680353

/tg/ here is pretty alright, but yeah. Every board seems to have hit a slump. Nothing really new or interesting is being made and the only things that come out now are shit.

At least with tabletop, it's easier to come up with rules for your own game (provided you have friends to play with) than it is to make your own guns.

>>626840

This, a walking 50. cal, ATGM launcher or mortar beats power armor and it looks like it will be easier to make.

>>644914

>>644913

>Ghana tier

Not really, that shit actually works they field tested the passive ones in syria and they were happy enough with it that they put in an order for all the sappers, then it will mortars, HMG ATGM, and AGL crews.

The problem is the same as in the US: battery.

The Russian requirement is 48h on a battery charge and most of the existing can barely do 20h.

Passive is a decent solution, it's cheap, it's rated for an extra 30kg, especially for Russia that has less problem with overheating and still like it's infantry with heavy weapons teams.

It means one guy can carry a Kord and his buddy the ammo, your LMGs are now HMGs. That's not insignificant.

>>680423

At that point how easy would it be to automate the unit?

>>680428

Drones and robots are dominating the battlefield and beating people? Wow, that's why we won in Afghanistan! How can the Taliban control most of the countryside and hold the Kabul government in such a tight condition when they cannot possibly beat the robots and drones!

>>680441

>ywn see combat involving zeppelins

I'd trade a million firefights with inbred sand farmers for one sideways glance at a zeppelin air raid.

>>630076

Remotely operated drones would make more sense for boarding.

>>680906

Thumbs have completely ruined warfare. Wars are meant to be fought with biting

your opponent and wildly flailing with your arms. Instead it's using gay lifeless tools to efficiently injure and kill the enemy. What a shame.

>>680839

Well duh.

Someone has to carry the 120mm RPGs and 12.7mm ammo you're gonna need to go through level IV rifle plates.

>>680928

Multicellular organisms completely ruined warfare. Wars is meant to be fought by cells throwing their whole beings into the battle. Instead it's gay animals and shit. What a shame.

Life has completely ruined warfare. Wars is meant to be fought by the forces of nature, broken rocks and wild winds covering the battlefield. Instead it's gay living beings doing gay living things. What a shame.

>>680928

You can't go any lower than a Tyrone.

>>680967

>complains about shirts

>is fine with pants

Only the bravest and fiercest warriors went into battle completely nude, and for good reason. Not only are you lighter, cooler, and have maximum mobility, but the sight of hundreds of naked men charging fully erect would put fear into any enemy.

>>680977

To be fair they rally ruined war. before guns weaklings and manlets would not survive wars, guns and explosives made men almost equal (aka communism) and wars dysgenic instead of eugenic.

Power supply is an issue. According to this https://www.arl.army.mil/arlreports/2002/ARL-TR-2764.pdf (some research done for the army) you need about 6kw to fully supply any possible need for one suit. Now, two 240V lines from a house (the dryer plug) can supply this, or you can make a shitty, slow suit that runs off of a 4kw diesel generator strapped to the back. Then you can armor it like a son of a bitch and hope for the best. At best though, that's an engineer's garage project run on a raspberry pi and a mark 1 nvg taped to the front. Could be useful in a warehouse scenario where you can just have power plugs everywhere and don't need to be fast.

HOWEVER

I had another idea involving special weapons teams. You use the mule in vid related that carries a very large power source and maybe a couple backpacks. Two or even three guys with long cables are attached to it which a) reduces weight on the suit proper and b) allows a much better power source to supply these suits. Maneuvers are done together and the team as a whole is a heavy weapons team. One guy has the super heavy machine gun and the others are point men. You send these guys in to clear a complex while your regulars flank, provide covering fire, etc. Said heavy weapons team draws lots of attention and blows shit up- you can even hide the dog behind cover or behind a suit, and even have regulars use a suit man as mobile cover. At least until we develop the miniaturized fission reactors that would be needed for the required output, it is something that could actually work. Hell, you can even mount a vehicle weapon or even little automated point defense guns for shooting down rockets onto the dog for even more protection and devastation.

>>681425

Nevermind.

I have stayed up till 8 AM and will now sleep till 6 PM

>>681454

Negative feedback. Many many pressure sensors mounted inside the casing of the suit, sets of which correspond to certain actuators per limb. Moving your arm up, for example, presses against the sensors which moves the arm, removing some of the pressure from the sensors- so movement continues only as long as you keep moving your arm. A simple example is the foot, you only need mount sensors in the toe as if you notice when tilting your foot up or down the toes go up or down the most, pressing on the corresponding sensors. All the body is doing is moving itself where it wants to be and the suit is moving just enough to get out of its way.

>>681345

>kick in door

>throw in a flashbang

>wait for it to go off

>rip power cables out of outlet

>run into room

>quickly try to locate power outlets before your battery runs out or the enemy recovers from the flashbang

>shoot the enemy

Also, squads are now two man strong, because it's unlikely for there to be more than four outlets per room without getting into the line of fire of a second door.

>>681461

>multiple hundred Watt devices on a single powerstrip.

The fuse never had a chance.

>>681345

At that point why not just make a bigger mule, mount the power source and the hardware and ammo it needs for several automated weapons on it, and just send a few thousand of them out to break through enemy lines and kill anything that doesn't have a friendly transponder signal. You could even put heavier armour on the killbot than you could on the suit.

>>681497

>Each man has a suit of power armour

>Each man has a mule/horse

>Each man is a plated juggernaut

>Each man has atgms, belt-fed machine guns, and point defense out the ass

>The knight aristocracy is once again viable in warfare

>>681500

GNU/suit when?

I want to go for the high score in wingsuit divebombing on the Austrian minecraft server.

>>681462

You'll be fine, man. Just pull out the breaker and wirenut the connections together. What's the worst that could happen? :^)

>>681503

>What's the worst that could happen

>>681317

But wait anon, in ancient war, you sen't all the strong men to war and they died, leaving only the weak and infirm to breed. Isn't that dysgenic too?

The AP ammo concern can be addressed by building the suit using slanted armor instead of flat plating. You want to encourage ricochet, getting hit with a rifle round hurts enough as is even with level 3 chest plating, and designing an entire suit of armor with the intention of it being able to take the force of a round is just asking for problems. Hell, this had already been addressed 600+ years ago when they realized that that the classic full helm used in the crusades was of terrible design, so they introduced the bascinet. Being as there is plenty of well educated individuals who study ballistics and would no doubt design a suit around how efficiently it is able to get rid of the AP problem, as some others have pointed out there is the power problem. You can’t use nuclear energy, you can’t just throw some solar panels on that motherfucker, gas is a no, and there isn’t a battery in this world with the energy capacity and compact enough to keep that suit running for upwards of days in extended firefights. A modern power armor suit would only be useful in close quarters operations such as the breaching of a building, and would need to be deployed very near to the target itself. Which means that it’s military viability is fucking zero, however if it was to be deployed by a law enforcement entity such as SWAT and the FBI, where it can be used in breach and clearing operations, it would be incredibly effective. It would be able to be deployed almost directly onto the site of the situation, and would dramatically reduce the time it would take to resolve said situation. You might even be able to send the fucker in alone to take most of the shock, and run a clean up crew when the dumbasses held up on site get tired of dealing with a two ton brick shit house that doesn’t give a fuck about your half assed fortifications and 50 round magazines you got from Jerry who upcharged you because you’re a bitch.

>>681513

>Can't use nuclear power

Like I said, I'm really interested in the possibilities of these:

>Due to the shortage of plutonium-238, a new kind of RTG assisted by subcritical reactions has been proposed.[42] In this kind of RTG, the alpha decay from the radioisotope is also used in alpha-neutron reactions with a suitable element such as beryllium. This way a long-lived neutron source is produced. Because the system is working with a criticality close to but less than 1, i.e. Keff < 1, a subcritical multiplication is achieved which increases the neutron background and produces energy from fission reactions. Although the number of fissions produced in the RTG is very small (making their gamma radiation negligible), because each fission reaction releases almost 30 times more energy than each alpha decay (200 MeV compared to 6 MeV), up to a 10% energy gain is attainable, which translates into a reduction of the 238Pu needed per mission. The idea was proposed to NASA in 2012 for the yearly NASA NSPIRE competition, which translated to Idaho National Laboratory at the Center for Space Nuclear Research (CSNR) in 2013 for studies of feasibility.[43][not in citation given]. However the essentials are unmodified.

Now, RTGS are normally one big unit but if you cut it in half and made two or even three small vertical tubes you can make it flat enough to sit as a backpack, maybe. Plutonium is the go-to for RTG but that has a power density of 0.54 W/g, while Polonium, despite having a tiny half life (100 days), has an amazing 120 W/g. My math on this is probably complete shit but even as a long shot it sounds feasible with enough engineering. Once the proof of concept is done it can just be made easier to produce and thus cheaper.

Totally agree with you on the plating/AP argument though.

>Law enforcement

Trash can EFP's when?

>>681520

Also it's a composite bi-metalic armor, elastic w/ good heat/friction dispersion brass on thick steel plate.