Clothing designed to thwart drones.
Clothing designed to thwart drones.
Anonymous 1 • February 5, 2013 12:35 PM
If only it would actually work.
Allen • February 5, 2013 12:37 PM
Magical thinking. I’m sure that will protect you from a Hellfire as well as a Ghost Shirt will stop a bullet.
Henning Makholm • February 5, 2013 1:15 PM
I dunno. If the images in the article are IR, it looks like it’s nice and warm at least. Not a bad quality for clothing.
I can imagine ppl now working on all kind of measures that can deal with drones. they are slow and noisy (radio). They are effective now, but how long till Chinise or Russians produce cheap enough something that can get it down or blind it.
Hans • February 5, 2013 1:52 PM
Did you guys miss the part where it says the guy’s an artist? It’s cleverly hidden as the very first word of the article.
The relevance of him being an artist is that the clothing doesn’t need to work, it needs to make you think about drones, surveillance, and what you can do about it.
almost old enough • February 5, 2013 2:17 PM
Probably the definition of terrorist will be expanded from “any male between 15 and 55 years old in the wrong place” to also include “anyone wearing stealth camo”.
Do you think they can actually tell your age from a drone? Probably the definition of terrorist is really: “anyone we killed”.
Musashi • February 5, 2013 3:59 PM
I need to outfit my car in that gear… 🙂
Clive Robinson • February 5, 2013 4:26 PM
OFF Topic for cloths
ON Topic for drones.
This evening the UK news from the BBC has been talking about a released US DoJ document that basicaly says it’s OK to use drones to do extra-judicial murder not just of foreigners provided…
1, They are belived to belong to a terrorist organisation.
2, They are belived to be activly endangering lives (imminent threat).
But ALSO US Citizens abroad as well but with only fractionaly tighter requirments…
However it just gives the usual “US officials” who are going to be making the decision not the level/status of the people doing the beliving and likewise not what they regard as belivable….
Scott • February 5, 2013 5:49 PM
If it isn’t true already, real time gait analysis will be enough to identify individuals from a gorgon stare platform. You can wear a burka of this material and it won’t help you one bit. After that the freedom hating Nazi Frogmen from Libya will start riding donkeys. And then the NRO will employ donkey detection software, so they’ll start riding sheep instead, and then…
It’s the usual arms race, just a different venue.
Droner • February 5, 2013 8:30 PM
Looking at the pictures, this outfit truly works only if you have a full head covering veil with tiny slits for eyes and a small mesh for breathing. Exactly like what the Talib force their women to wear. This full-head cover apparel is brilliant camouflage – the gun toting vermin can walk around with AK-47s hidden under and not raise suspicion either on the ground or with aerial surveillance.
averros • February 6, 2013 2:57 AM
The gun-toting female vermin has more balls than all the geeks posing as soldiers here together. They did manage to tie the pants of the mightiest (and most expensive, by very long far) military in the world; and they are winning the war.
Vles • February 6, 2013 3:47 AM
The wrestling adage that there is a block for every hold applies equally to war. Each new device is invariably followed by it’s self induced counter. The utilization of these new methods and their counters, these holds and blocks, is highly useful in that they add to our combat repertoire. But their employment is fraught with danger, if, beguiled by their transitory preeminence, we place our reliance wholly upon them.
Major George S. Patton, Jr., The Effects of Weapons on War, Nov 1930.
Paeniteo • February 6, 2013 4:28 AM
@Clive: “(…drones are allowed to kill…) US Citizens abroad as well”
As a non-US citizen, why should I care?
I am free game already anyway.
wiredog • February 6, 2013 6:12 AM
the OFF Pocket, a phone accessory that blocks all incoming and outgoing communication from your phone.
@Clive, the AUMF pretty much authorizes that. Has since 2001.
EightSevenNine • February 6, 2013 6:59 AM
@wiredog Better remove the battery than just switch the phone off. Because even if the phone is switched off some parts are still powered. Particularly the RTC.
Jason Richardson-White • February 6, 2013 7:42 AM
In Charlottesville, VA (home of U.VA.), the city council has passed a (toothless) resolution asking, more-or-less politely, for no drones. They are hoping for a “knock-on effect” in other cities. From Salon, see virginia city first in nation with anti drone resolution.
Has anyone set up a “drone watch” site, similar to some of the sites used to track satellites? Radically different scales, I know, since satellite orbits are basically static. But it would be interesting to have some actual statistical data on drone use by authorities in the US.
PHF • February 6, 2013 12:32 PM
IR reflective clothing is quite common, especially in military surplus.
Ant-thermal imaging is relatively easy, if you’re prepared to walk around inside a greenhouse all day. Glass is a problem for TI.
Aubrey • February 7, 2013 12:58 PM
almost old enough – Google “IA-0257-09” and see just who our government thinks is a “terrorist”…
Reports have it that more than 70% of the US population falls into one or more of their newly defined categories….
Subscribe to comments on this entry
Sidebar photo of Bruce Schneier by Joe MacInnis.
Leave a comment