Sup?
So let's learn about Virtual Reality applications in the REAL world as opposed to the video game industry.
The military has been training soldiers for years using VR. There is a plethora (Dillard's word that means a great big bunch) of info out there on it. Please explore:
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/army-virtual-reality/
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120913/TSJ01/309130003/
http://defensesystems.com/articles/2012/11/15/c4isr-2-networked-training.aspx
http://www.livescience.com/14477-army-orders-virtual-reality-training-soldiers.html
http://www.vrs.org.uk/virtual-reality-military/index.html
In related news, do you ever feel like maybe we're the only country in the world that actually allows this very valuable information about how we train our military to be put online for all the world to see? (This is not your directive for the week, just a question to consider) Sometimes I think it's crazy how much we overshare.
Directive: Choose one of the articles, tell us which one you chose. BRIEFLY summarize and give an INFORMED opinion. Show some EVIDENCE to back up your opinion.
Example:
I chose the VRS article (tell us which article). It talks about the 5 different areas in which the military has started to rely more on VR training in order to avoid death and serious injury (briefly summarize). My opinion is that this will be used to save lives in the future (informed opinion). I thought it was interesting that the article says that the VR training will not take the place of the real life training, but will be used to supplement it (evidence).
As always, I want you to ACTUALLY read and become informed about technology directions and trends. This is not free time, it's MY time.
Talk to me . . .
62 comments:
For me, the most interesting article in this set would be "A Digital Doppelganger for Every Soldier", which details the army's plans to develop a virtual reality world that soldiers can train in. I think this is an excellent idea because, with this world, soldiers can learn from mistakes they would make in the real world without having to suffer the physical and mental repercussions; worst case scenario, they would just get a few nasty comments thrown their way by their fellow troops.
-Oliver, 1st period
I thought that the "Marines Get Virtual Explosions in the Real World" article was very interesting. Instead of transporting soliders to a different world, this system uses the real world and projects training objects onto it. I think that it will better prepare the marines than the virtual reality used by the army. The biggest problem with virtual reality is movement; this technology basically solves that problem.
-McClanahan, 1st period
I chose the article from Wired. It talks about how this new technology may lead to the wrong kind of people trying to join the military. My opinion is that they are very right, and it might not turn out like they expect it to. One man says ”At some point, piloting a plane in combat is different from piloting a computer workstation,” Singer noted. “Just as hitting a real tennis ball is not the same as hitting the Wii version.” People who play video games would treat it like a game even though it is real life business.
Eason, 1st Period :D
I chose the live science article. It talks about how the U.S army orders virtual reality training for soldiers. In my opinion, this will really help the troops by getting used to the environment around them. I thought was cool when the article stated "the soldier of the future will train in a virtual reality world that essentially mixes "Call of Duty" with "Star Trek's" holodeck.".
Cameron, 1st prd.
The article that struck me was "Marines Get Virtual Explosions in the Real World". It gives the army training in real life situations without the risk. I personally believe this is great, because it trains them while they're doing whatever they're position is in the army. The only concern is the movement for the brain is different from the body, thus causing them to feel sick.
-Crawford, 1st period
I chose the Virtual Reality Plan: A Digital Doppleganger for Every Soldier. It talked about how the Army plans to give evry soldier a digital doppleganger in order to train. My opinion is that the soldiers' training will be better as the avatars are more realistic. I read in the article that if the Army's training is based on virtual reality, then more ralistic avatars would make sense.
-Barrios, 1st period
The article I chose is "Tight budgets drive training into the networked virtual world."
This article is mainly about how live training in the Army through the virtual world is cheaper than spending a lot of money on certain things for this gaming process that would cost the makers of these games to spend more money than they bargained for. From the article reads, "Tighter budgets have pushed military leaders toward increasing the use of simulation for training, which has sparked technological advances that have made the task of preparing troops for combat more efficient and less expensive, military and industry experts say."
In my opinion, this is a great idea and would be worth the amount of money it is to have it's gamers to fully enjoy this virtual world experience without getting injured or harmed and would make the creators pleased with this affordable budget at its price.
-Heyn, 1st period
I think it's a good idea to make a virtual clone of a real soldier because not only will it be easier for one to train, but the chances of them getting hurt will decrease.
I used the first article >http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/army-virtual-reality/
~Lopez, 2nd period
i chose the defese system article. i chose this article because it would make training for soldiers much easier. they are building this to help train soldiers better. i think its a great i dea because they can train whil seeing what is actually going to be happening.
johnson, 2nd
I think the digital doppelganger makes sense because it's like a personal profile with stats. Though virtual reality is good training i still think real training tops it off but virtual reality gives you the ability to train tactcs in heat of battle, only difference is you can respawn.(Kade)
I thought that the "A Digital Doppelganger for Every Soldier," was a very interesting article. It detailed the pros and cons of the game and how it would effect the person onfield and i think that it would actually help sorta kinda
NATEPOLEON DYNAMITE
2nd Period
This is an all new way for soldiers to see how they would act and react in a real time battlefield, giving them an idea of their strengths and weaknesses. To me, thi sis the best way to train them, this is th eclosest to getting to the live action, without the risk of actually dying of course!
http://www.livescience.com/14477-army-orders-virtual-reality-training-soldiers.html
Kyle 2nd
The most interesting article for me was "Virtual Reality in the Millitary", It shows how the millitary uses virtual reality fo r example they use it, Flight simulation, Battlefield simulation, Medic training (battlefield), Vehicle simulation, Virtual boot camp. It also says how it is trying to figure out how to help Vetarns with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
Delagarza, 2nd Period.
I chose the article Virtual Reality in the Military. It talks about every aspect of the virtual reality training from Virtual boot camp to Virtual Navy and Air Force training. I think it will make for much better training and can help save soldiers lives in the future. It also helps them simulate scenarios without the risk of injury or death.
Slide, 2nd period
The article that got me was the one on live science about the U.S Army's virtual reality traning for soldiers. It's a mix between call of duty and star trek. It delivers a more realistic training experience for the one in training.
Jones 2nd period
The most helpful and easy to understand article for me was the "Marines get Virtual Explotions in the Real World." This article is very up front tell you what it is how it works and how it was developed and by whom. I believe this might have a positive if limited impact because no simulation can ever really live up to the actual experience and each persons individual response;especially since as the article states "The big problem with virtual reality is locomotion."
-Torres 2nd Per.
I also chose the VRS website. the army has started to rely more on virtual training to simulate real life situations. My opinion is that this will help soldiers be more prepared in battle. I thought it was cool that they also use the virtual reality to help treat post traumatice stress disorder.
Conner Covington
2nd period
Some National Guard units in such states as New Jersey and Florida have tried similar virtual reality training. But the new system, awarded under competitive contract to the companies Intelligent Decisions and RealTime Immersive, is the first official Army program of record for all its soldiers.
jacorey winn ,
period 2
I picked the artile from live science. It talks about how this gives soldiers the opportunity to train in a virtual world, it's very a effective & better than live training because live training can be very dangerous & causes injuries. Everything is very realistic & there are motion sensors placed in different places to catch every movement made. It's a lot more to this new technology, but in my opinion I think it's very interesting & the safest way to go. If it prevents injury then I believe it's the best way to go.
Laronda Steadham, 2nd period
http://www.livescience.com/14477-army-orders-virtual-reality-training-soldiers.html
In the near future, the U.S. military may be switching from actual wood and metal training grounds to virtual training grounds that would be able to accurately replicate gunfire and explosives, something that can't safely be done in the real world. The U.S. Army has already paid Dismounted Soldier $57 million to begin work on this possible solution. It would essentially mix Call of Duty with Star Trek's holodeck.
Culpepper, 2nd Period
I chose the virtual reality simulation it enables them to do so but without the risk of death or a serious injury. They can re-enact a particular scenario, for example engagement with an enemy in an environment in which they experience this but without the real world risks. This has proven to be safer and less costly than traditional training methods.
George, 1st period
I choose the Virtual reality article. This article dicusses how Virtual reality is adopted by the naval, military and air forces services for taining soldiers for dangerous combats. I think it it very smart for them to do this. It slow down the deaths of our soldiers. Virtual reality is also used to treat post-traumatic stress disorder. Soldiers suffering from battlefield trauma and other psychological conditions can learn how to deal with their symptoms in a ‘safe’ environment.
-Coen, 2nd period
I chose the article Defense Systems article, which is about how the military is putting in an (ITE) Integrated Training Environment. I think that this will be very effective in keeping resources and decreasing the amount of training accidents or destruction of planes or any other military vehicle. Even though there is the aspect of not being in real life, the ability to learn from your mistakes without suffering actual injuries.
- Irwin, 2nd
I chose the defensive systems article. It talks about how the budgets are tighter for the military leaders, also their new virtual constructive system starting up for their army. My opinion is its gonna be way to expensive for them to set up. The national training center at fort Irwin cost 24 to 25million dollars.
Hill 2nd period
Wow. 7 people in 2nd period who didn't get my directives addressed. Just. Wow.
I chose the "Wired" article. It said that it trained the military with realistic virtual reality tools like video games but more real life. I like this because not everyone has the physical stamina and strenth of the super soldiers in COD. This will make the training better and more realistic. It says "A soldier’s performance during physical training, for example, would be inputted into the digital replica’s athletic abilities."
Joshua Denton, 7th
i chose the article virtual reality plan. which is making soldiers have real digital practice and giving them their own virtual dobbelganger which is an avatar based in the game. Nevertheless i think it's a great idea to create this training stint allowing real life sounds, bombs, and guns, just on a screen. This will also help and save more soldiers from leaving or getting injured quicker in actions.
-taylor walker , 7th period
i chose the article virtual reality plan. which is making soldiers have real digital practice and giving them their own virtual dobbelganger which is an avatar based in the game. Nevertheless i think it's a great idea to create this training stint allowing real life sounds, bombs, and guns, just on a screen. This will also help and save more soldiers from leaving or getting injured quicker in actions.
-taylor walker , 7th period
http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120913/TSJ01/309130003/
"This is a real game-changer"
The U.S. Marine Corps has unveiled a prototype training system that uses augmented reality to digitally superimpose objects upon a real landscape.
Wah, 7th period
i chose the article from wired..it talks about the way they want future training to be like , they want to give everybody a game set pretty much like a real life avatar..
I choose the "Tighter budgets push training into the networked virtual world" Topic. Basically it explains how due to budget constraints, the military is turning to virtual reality to train soldiers in the field. I don't see the logic in this, because A, Virtual reality, especially good VR, is HIGHLY expensive. and B, Real field training in itself gives more experience and is obviously more realistic than any type of VR, although it's safer. but you really cannot replicate any type of firefight scenario in the virtual world v. the real world. There are just too many factors.|
-Zach, 7th
francisco morales
i thought that the article from the wired because they talk about how the new tehnology can get into the wrong person hand thats trying to joint the military
I chose the article from Wired.it talks about how this new technology thats' been invented in the millitary can possibly go wron because some people do it to have fun. In my opinion , this is true because the result migh not be like how they expected to be like. A person from the military even said that riding a plane in stupid game is diggerent than in real life. He even mention this like in the Wii version like playing tennis and hitting the ball, its different than in real life. Soon after, people would just go to the army to play videogames, and not taking it serious and treating it like a real life stradegy and would end up dead.
-Ibanez, 7th period
I chose the Wired.com article. It breifly talks about how the army wants to improve their virtual reality simulators by creating perfect dopplegangers, copies, of their soldiers. In my opinion, this will be a good enhancement to the simulators becuase now, the soldiers can see that even though the simulation isn't real, it makes it seem and feel as if it was real. In the article, the author states that this improvement will help soldiers realize that they are just ordinary people and so they don't get the impression that "they’ve got mad superhero skills."
Your Favorite Mexican, 7th Period
I thought that the the Army's Virtual Reality Plan was very interesting. Basically the army wants every soldier to be what they can be in the future, no matter if its on screen or off screen. The digital doppelganger is introduced in this article, and pretty much helps the soldiers in military and their athletic abilities. It is described as an custom avatar on screen.
Garcia(: 7th pd
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/army-virtual-reality/
It talked about how they wants soliders to be as best as they can and create avatars in the game based on what they are not some fancy superheroes that this is a flesh and blood war and the avatars should look like them and if they do a good workout then it should reflect it in their avatar even this can be good and can simulate as good as possible it has they flaw like not actaully doin the actuall thing like it is different to playing Wii spots like hitting a tennis ball than taking an actaull racekt and hitting it for reals.
This sounds like a great start to help beniefit our army to be better and help newbies to sratch the surface of what it really is than an over examplified army reality like that shows you to fly and not die in some many bullets and getting revived like your dead so stay dead it is not a joke.
-Roland 7th Period
I chose the VRS article. It talks about how all three military services have adopted this virtually reality and the different ways that they use them. My opinion on this is that it will train them even better for war and we will also have a stronger military. "This is particualy used for training soldiers for combat situations and other dangerous settings where they have to learn how to react in an appropriate manner."
I chose the live science article. it just talks about how the us army just ordered a $57 million soldier the could give the ability of virtual reality training to any soldier on the field. my opinion is that the idea of this is great because it will provide them with more preperation for the real deal. And I think its neat they way the audio of the helmets work saying that "soldiers would put on a helmet-mounted headset that plunges them into the virtual missions. The headset also provides "cinema-quality sound" to accurately produce the gunfire sounds of, say, an AK-47 assault rifle versus an M4."
Teal 7th Period
I chose the VRS article. It talks about how all three military services have adopted this virtually reality and the different ways that they use them. My opinion on this is that it will train them even better for war and we will also have a stronger military. "This is particualy used for training soldiers for combat situations and other dangerous settings where they have to learn how to react in an appropriate manner."
-Wright 7th
I chose the VR. The VR is a virtual reality training the army wants to start using to prevent death,injury,and improve their soldiers ability. My opinion is that the VR will prepare the soldiers better, and improve their ability. I thought it would be better for the soldiers to use it so we can a better and improved army.
http://www.vrs.org.uk/virtual-reality-military/index.html
Carlos, 7th
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/army-virtual-reality/
I chose the dangerroom article. It talks about virtually training military soldiers. I think that its a good idea to train soldiers this way because their avatar will resemble them. If a soldier is huffing and puffing in a 11 minute mile run, their avatar will do the same.
Macon-7th
the " Virtual Reality in the Military and Virtual Reality" was the most interesting. the article talks about how virtual simulators can help with the training for any solder and so they can be prepared for combat also it helps soldiers with Post Tramatic Stress Dissorder adjust to the symptoms. i strongly think that in the future this virtual reality simulator will help soldiers with PTSD suffer less or just erase it completly. They are doing studies to fully understand and expand their knowledge of the system helping with PTSD
- Cano 7th
I chose the Virtual Realitty Plan: A Digital Doppelganger for Every Soldier. This article talks about that the Army wants to give this digital doppelganger to every soldier to have a better training. My opinion is that they are using avatars in the digital doppelganger and they kill people in real life so that might confuse some of the soldiers.Army wants to give every soldier a digital doppelganger.Venegas7th
Graded
I chose the defensenews article and i thought it was very interesting because it talks about how they are using vr to train the soldiers instead of sending them out in the field to train. I honestly think this is good for the soldiers because they dont have to go to who knows where for training but vr is not like it is out on the field they are different so we will see how it goes. They said the plan was to use vr to keep the soldiers safe while training but are they really training them by replacing going out in the field with using vr.
Thumann/T-Dawg 8th period
I chose the virtual reality simulation it enables them to virtually act adn to do so but without the risk getting hurt or serious injury. They can re-enact a lot of scenes, for example you can engage in combat with an foe and it looks like virtually real experience without real risks. This has proven to be safer and less costly than traditional training methods.
Ikner - 8th Period .'
I chose the article "Marines Get Explosions in the Real World" because it looked cool. Basicly it takes the layout of a real environment and adds the virtual military stuff to it, crating a vast and safer environment to help with trainging. One problem for vr is movement with this you only need a few feet of room per soldier, crating room for whole platoons in a jym size room.
Cody Langley 8th.
I chose The article, "Army’s Virtual Reality Plan: A Digital Doppelganger for Every Soldier" ( http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/army-virtual-reality/ ).
This article told about the new virtual reality program the Army is using to train troops for real-life war scenarios. My opinion of this is that it's wasting a lot of money on things that the military could simply have the soldiers do in real life, so that we won't just have a lot of kids who like COD as our soldiers. This is proven when the article says, "the method threatens to churn out soldiers who are seasoned pros on the Xbox."
-Labbit, 8th period.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/army-virtual-reality/
It breifly talks about how the army wants to improve their virtual reality simulators by creating perfect copies, of their soldiers. In my opinion, this will be a good wayfor the soldiersuse the simulators becuase now, the soldiers can see that even though the simulation isn't real, it makes it seem and feel as if it was real. In the article, the author states that this improvement will help soldiers realize that they are just ordinary people and so they don't get the impression that "they’ve got mad superhero skills." and that the people from the army cant just press the restart button because they have to see that the virtual life there seeing is not real and if you die in the field the game cant restartand thats why is also wrong to use that visual to the army
-Castro 8th period ^_^
I chose the article from wired because it shows how the military is starting to get more immersive in virtual reality technology to improve soldiers' combat and tactical abilities. I like this idea because 1) it provides a safe virtual world for soldiers to train, 2) the idea of entire virtual worlds with personal avatars sounds kind of awesome and 3)we could end up having entire wars through virtual reality instead of endangering civilations, which is a LOT more peaceful.
Cespedes- 8th
i read the http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120913/TSJ01/309130003/ article and it was about how the military , specifically the army and air force were using VR technology and its drawbacks such as how the graphics were only lifelike at distances and how it is sometimes hampered by cost and locomotion restrictions.
- D'Andre 8th period
I choose the Defence News article. It talks about a Head-Mounted Display that could display things into real world terrian. I think that this could make training against enemies easier when the enemies are hard to replicate in real life. The way to do this is roughly done because the software can already project "scaled virtual images of objects, such as tanks or helicopters, against the backdrop of the real terrain as seen through the HMD."
Taylor 8th
i chose the wired article. it talks about using virtual technology as a training for the army and militay. you get to make the avator exactly like you and you cant make it better because if you do when you go on the battle field you wont be prepared.
Sweat 8th period
The atricle that I chose was the defense news article. The article talks about how the army is creating virtual worlds which are similar to the areas of combat. My opinion is that it is a great idea because it is allowing the soldiers to get some experience or a "taste" of what the battlefield will be like. In the article it says that the soldiers will wear a virtual headset with animated vehicles and weapons with a backdrop of actaul landscape so they know exactly what to expect.
Cold, 8th
After reading Wired's article "Army’s Virtual Reality Plan: A Digital Doppelganger for Every Soldier," which gives a basic outline of the VR program currently employed by the US Military, I found the idea of such a simulation to be unnescessary. No videogame, virtual reality or not, can truly compare to actually going to war. Perhaps it will help in some areas, such as reaction time and hand-eye coordination, but these can also be honed in more realistic situations, such as a game of paintball.
After reading Wired's article "Army’s Virtual Reality Plan: A Digital Doppelganger for Every Soldier," which gives a basic outline of the VR program currently employed by the US Military, I found the idea of such a simulation to be unnescessary. No videogame, virtual reality or not, can truly compare to actually going to war. Perhaps it will help in some areas, such as reaction time and hand-eye coordination, but these can also be honed in more realistic situations, such as a game of paintball.
Kwiatkowski, Eighth
For me, the most cool thing in this set would be http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/army-virtual-reality/
i think that you would not make mistakes in the real would but that can make in the simulation.
dillion sanches
I chose the Wired article. It talks about a plan for a virtual reality world for soldiers to train in. I think this a great idea because we can not only give them new challenges to solve for real combat.
Gipson, 8th period
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/01/army-virtual-reality
http://defensesystems.com/articles/2012/11/15/c4isr-2-networked-training.aspx
This is great for the budget but is the cost of training worth the cost of lives cutting twenty mil out of training bis nice but as every gamer knows the game can never be the exact same as real life vr or not simply programing your athletic test scores isnt enough it doesn't account for adrinaline dehydration and many other uncalculateable body functions.
to this i just have to say nice try
Ben Blough
8th
I chose the defense systems article. I chose this article mainly because other than the other articles that talk about how cool it is, this article talks my language: cold hard cash. Other than spending at LEAST $20 million on just transporting troops to training facilities, all that money could be used to buy equipment for virtual training. Trainers could have full control over what the soldiers experiance and leave no variables. Other advatages of virtual training verses outdoor simulation is being able to simulate scenarios that other wise would be to costly to reproduce, and that reproducing explosions would be dangerous. The purpose of training is to get as close to real as possible without the danger and fear of actual harm. A fighter jet piolet can practice flying and can feel and see what it would be like for real, without having the possibilty of crashing a multi-million dollar plane.
-Carrasco 8th hr <3
(http://defensesystems.com/articles/2012/11/15/c4isr-2-networked-training.aspx)
Graded
I picked "Army's Virtual Reality Plan: A Doppleganger for Every Solider," (the one from wired.com) because it was the most in depth about how each solider gets their own avatar in the game and it loads information about each individual solider, so that the difficulties they would face in real life would be present in the virtual world as well. I think this is a really good plan because the soliders have a more realistic expectation of battle situations.
-SWalker, 7th
Post a Comment