Phalanx was successfully adapted to shoot down mortar shells in Iraq (C-RAM.) If it has a radar return Phalanx can probably kill it. This sort of weapon could be adapted with infrared or other anti-radiation sensors as well.
I think the answer to defending against offensive UAVs is defensive UAVs. Just today a story[1] appeared about a USAF Reaper shoot down of another UAV. Supposedly a first.
I could see it being hard to aim at them accurately enough to hit, iirc the CIWS systems are radar aimed for missle defense. Depends what kind of UAV we're talking about an antipersonnel UAV could probably present a small enough radar signature.
A lot of people have told me that I would never use the maths, physics and CS I have learnt at school... and the opposite happened!
In my job (at Distran, a start-up based in Zürich - founder), I had to use a lot of maths, electronics, physics that I learnt at school. Most of the people here are using their scientific/technical skills to simplify experiments, create new algorithms etc... of course this is the 10% part of the job as implementing ideas take most of the time. And you have the gluing part as well.
My answer to you would be to work in a start-up where a broad spectrum of tasks are to be solved by a single person. Hardware start-ups in particular need to cover an even broader spectrum...
One aspect I found very important was to "choose the good combats", something that is worth to fight for, so that even after years you are still motivated and proud of what you have done. E.g we are making a gas detector that have obvious good effects on mortality or environment.
Interesting and well written but I can only disagree with the author. A few months ago, I read the love letters my grand grandfather wrote to my grand grandmother when he was at war. I seriously doubt anyone will be able to read the emails I write in 70 years.
Besides most of intellectuals of the past centuries were prolific in sending letters to their relatives and we know a lot from them through these letters. I don't expect the same to happen with contemporary writers.
Maybe our grand children will be able to get a few pictures from us, that were printed and stored safely...
What makes you think digital content won't be preserved in quantity/quality comparable to printed/handwritten content of earlier times?
Perhaps private messages and emails are less likely to be preserved after the account-holder is deceased, but pretty much everything you do publicly on Facebook is preserved and accessible to others after your death in a memorialized account. It's not hard to believe that our descendants will be able to casually search through our daily musings and pictures of our dinners and whatnot, either on Facebook if it still exists, or an archived version of it captured before the site is taken down/replaced.
I also wouldn't rule out more private writings finding their way along in some form or another. People are often sentimental and keep things that belonged to their loved ones. I recall reading a story not long ago of a man who kept his father's video game save files, with the suggestion that he may try passing them on to his children.
But will Facebook exist in 70 years time? Or will it go the way of so many other services. I wonder if the AOL chats I had 20 years ago are somewhere? Or the forum posts on long defunct communities? Or the IRC chats.
Now, I want to be clear that many of these things shouldn't be saved. I don't believe that the Internet should be archived, but rather that with physical media the choice is simple: save it or throw it. With the Internet there is less choice and what exists is complex and sometimes out of your control.
