Section No6’s crappy sniper tech















5 thoughts on “Section No6’s crappy sniper tech

    • Wow. That is pretty scary and a morbidly fascinating interaction model. Still, PGFs, according to the article, require the gunner to aim the weapon. I wonder what the laws are around that.

  1. Pingback: Report Card: Ghost in the Shell | Make It So

  2. I’ll have to re-watch the movie, but my recollection was that the undercarriage equipment may serve the pilot rather than the sniper op’s.

    I also get the feeling that the post-war climate the Nipponese agencies find themselves in would impose restrictions (either because of ethics or more likely because of treaties) on how AI can be weaponised.

  3. I can think of a few points:
    1) Perhaps the 2nd camera is used to help give a second point of view for depth measurements.
    2) We are talking about cyborgs with mechanical limbs. How do we know that they aren’t as fast and precise a turret? I mean, their
    3) Placement. If you have it tied to a dropship you lose the stealth of a placed sniper. It could be cheaper to have one sniper who can sit in a ship, hide on a rooftop, etc, then a smart gun. The other thing I can see is guns are a lot easier to damage, lose, etc, then people, so it could make economic sense to put the fancy electronics in something with a self-preservation instinct.
    That is a way to avoid the technology beating the characters thing: Make the characters the computers.

Leave a Reply to Fake Name Cancel reply