7 ms·

Breakthrough in cloaking technology grabs military's attention

40 points by smaili 11y ago

zero-rated 11y ago
Fuck the military.
- scottLobster 11y ago
  Given that military funding is likely the main reason this amazing tech might see the light of day, I'm not so sure. Also, that GPS in your phone? You can thank the military for that. Not to mention the foundations of the internet, among many other technologies that have had massive impact after transitioning into civilian hands.
  - eis 11y ago
    I doubt that without military those inventions, especially the internet wouldn't have been created. Especially if the humongous funding of the military would be completely used for research. In fact we might have seen even more amazing inventions. In the end there is no way to tell.
    - melling 11y ago
      The money wouldn't be use for research because that's not how the economy works. This is covered in the frequent HN submission "Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa" https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-a-1970-letter-to-a-nun-in-africa/ https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-...
      - morsch 11y ago
        That's just an argument for government directed research spending (specifically: astronomy), not military spending.
        melling 11y ago
        The point is that if you don't spend the money on the military, it doesn't mean that the money will be redirected to non-military research. We justify spending large amounts of research dollar in the name of "national security". If we didn't need a military tomorrow, social programs would get the money or taxpayers would simply want their money back.
        brixon 11y ago
        A lot of our wars are funded with borrowed money, so we never really had it in the first place. http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/economic http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/economic
        melling 11y ago
        Where did I say anything about war? The military is always a big expense.
        morsch 11y ago
        Oh sure. But that doesn't make military spending a particularly efficient way of financing research, just a politically opportune one.
        melling 11y ago
        No one said that it was the most efficient way. I'd love for more private sector or publicly research but alas corporations and the taxpayer doesn't seem to want to fund more.
        morsch 11y ago
        You didn't make any such claims, but the fact remains that fielding the research benefits of military spending without those caveats we've worked out is misguiding, which is how the whole thread started out.
  - x5n1 11y ago
    Yes and the trillions of dollars wasted would not have produced any results had it not been for the military. Seriously we can all do without the military. Period. The quicker we can get rid of such a parasitic organization that has plagued humanity for thousands of years the better.
    - Tarks 11y ago
      "Cyrus explained softly to Adam the nature of a soldier ... He told his son of the sad dignity that can belong to a soldier, that he is necessary in the light of all the failures of man - the penalty of our frailties" They exist because humans and our current behaviour are flawed, we haven't found better conflict resolution techniques. The sad truth of this world is nothing is yours unless you can protect it. I know the reply button is right there but please stop spouting rubbish.
    - Retra 11y ago
      Perhaps your understanding of the role and capabilities of a military are too narrow-minded for you to see how to employ them in a positive and productive manner?
  - nine_k 11y ago
    This goes pretty far back into the past. For instance, Leonardo was a military engineer for a large chunk of his life, and many of his inventions are clearly military-themed.
- gfosco 11y ago
  We wouldn't have any of this stuff if it wasn't for the military.. we'd all be dead.
  - gue5t 11y ago
    Without the military, who would have killed us?
    - gfosco 11y ago
      Other militaries, obviously. I'm shocked at the views represented here... F the military? What is this, tree-hugginator?
      - gue5t 11y ago
        I think the sentiment was intended to be "fuck the military" in general, not "fuck the military from your specific country but leave the rest of the military alone".
    - titanomachy 11y ago
      Bears?
    - djrogers 11y ago
      Non-state actors? Religious zealots? Power-hungry dictators? Alligators? Getting rid of the vicious sheep dogs would make the sheep feel safer entitle wolves showed up.
      - oneJob 11y ago
        Which brings up the question, where does the military stop and police begin?
- prodmerc 11y ago
  Because corporate/business wars are better? People may not end up dying, but they do end up in prison and hit rock bottom from which they can not crawl out of. Which may be worse than death sometimes. Everything is war...
rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
I'm afraid. It's not the military that could really end up abusing invisibility, it's non-state actors who could literally act as ghosts. If there was just one broad daylight murder on the streets of Manhattan then, well, 14 years ago there were four plane hijackings and look what that did to air travel. Imagine the same fear when stepping out for a cup of coffee.
- placeybordeaux 11y ago
  A terror attack on the streets is a fairly easy thing to plan and you don't need extreme cutting edge technology to pull one off. People do it all the time, just usually not in the west.
- djrogers 11y ago
  As the article points out, this isn't real invisibility - the object being hidden from specific wavelengths is still in front of something that isn't, so while you may not be able to a guy on the street, you'd see a guy shaped hole in from of that starbucks he is walking by.
  - rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
    So how does that asterisk stop someone from dropping in, taking their shots, and fleeing without any way to identify them?
    - steamer25 11y ago
      If I understand the article correctly, the material can be designed to absorb, rather than reflect, certain frequencies of electromagnetic radiation. When this occurs in the visible spectrum, we call such materials, "black". If it were really effective, clothing made from it would appear to be so dark that it couldn't get any more black--aka none more black. Existing clothing might not be quite that dark but it probably gets pretty close in terms of human visibility. The article would probably be more accurate to call this advancement a potential improvement to stealth technology since it sounds like the intent is to conceal planes from radar.

40 points by smaili 11y ago

zero-rated 11y ago

Fuck the military.

scottLobster 11y ago
Given that military funding is likely the main reason this amazing tech might see the light of day, I'm not so sure. Also, that GPS in your phone? You can thank the military for that. Not to mention the foundations of the internet, among many other technologies that have had massive impact after transitioning into civilian hands.
- eis 11y ago
  I doubt that without military those inventions, especially the internet wouldn't have been created. Especially if the humongous funding of the military would be completely used for research. In fact we might have seen even more amazing inventions. In the end there is no way to tell.
  - melling 11y ago
    The money wouldn't be use for research because that's not how the economy works. This is covered in the frequent HN submission "Why Explore Space? A 1970 Letter to a Nun in Africa" https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-a-1970-letter-to-a-nun-in-africa/ https://launiusr.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/why-explore-space-...
    - morsch 11y ago
      That's just an argument for government directed research spending (specifically: astronomy), not military spending.
      - melling 11y ago
        The point is that if you don't spend the money on the military, it doesn't mean that the money will be redirected to non-military research. We justify spending large amounts of research dollar in the name of "national security". If we didn't need a military tomorrow, social programs would get the money or taxpayers would simply want their money back.
        brixon 11y ago
        A lot of our wars are funded with borrowed money, so we never really had it in the first place. http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/economic http://watson.brown.edu/costsofwar/costs/economic
        melling 11y ago
        Where did I say anything about war? The military is always a big expense.
        morsch 11y ago
        Oh sure. But that doesn't make military spending a particularly efficient way of financing research, just a politically opportune one.
        melling 11y ago
        No one said that it was the most efficient way. I'd love for more private sector or publicly research but alas corporations and the taxpayer doesn't seem to want to fund more.
        morsch 11y ago
        You didn't make any such claims, but the fact remains that fielding the research benefits of military spending without those caveats we've worked out is misguiding, which is how the whole thread started out.
- x5n1 11y ago
  Yes and the trillions of dollars wasted would not have produced any results had it not been for the military. Seriously we can all do without the military. Period. The quicker we can get rid of such a parasitic organization that has plagued humanity for thousands of years the better.
  - Tarks 11y ago
    "Cyrus explained softly to Adam the nature of a soldier ... He told his son of the sad dignity that can belong to a soldier, that he is necessary in the light of all the failures of man - the penalty of our frailties" They exist because humans and our current behaviour are flawed, we haven't found better conflict resolution techniques. The sad truth of this world is nothing is yours unless you can protect it. I know the reply button is right there but please stop spouting rubbish.
  - Retra 11y ago
    Perhaps your understanding of the role and capabilities of a military are too narrow-minded for you to see how to employ them in a positive and productive manner?
- nine_k 11y ago
  This goes pretty far back into the past. For instance, Leonardo was a military engineer for a large chunk of his life, and many of his inventions are clearly military-themed.
gfosco 11y ago
We wouldn't have any of this stuff if it wasn't for the military.. we'd all be dead.
- gue5t 11y ago
  Without the military, who would have killed us?
  - gfosco 11y ago
    Other militaries, obviously. I'm shocked at the views represented here... F the military? What is this, tree-hugginator?
    - gue5t 11y ago
      I think the sentiment was intended to be "fuck the military" in general, not "fuck the military from your specific country but leave the rest of the military alone".
  - titanomachy 11y ago
    Bears?
  - djrogers 11y ago
    Non-state actors? Religious zealots? Power-hungry dictators? Alligators? Getting rid of the vicious sheep dogs would make the sheep feel safer entitle wolves showed up.
    - oneJob 11y ago
      Which brings up the question, where does the military stop and police begin?
prodmerc 11y ago
Because corporate/business wars are better? People may not end up dying, but they do end up in prison and hit rock bottom from which they can not crawl out of. Which may be worse than death sometimes. Everything is war...

rm_-rf_slash 11y ago

I'm afraid. It's not the military that could really end up abusing invisibility, it's non-state actors who could literally act as ghosts. If there was just one broad daylight murder on the streets of Manhattan then, well, 14 years ago there were four plane hijackings and look what that did to air travel. Imagine the same fear when stepping out for a cup of coffee.

placeybordeaux 11y ago
A terror attack on the streets is a fairly easy thing to plan and you don't need extreme cutting edge technology to pull one off. People do it all the time, just usually not in the west.
djrogers 11y ago
As the article points out, this isn't real invisibility - the object being hidden from specific wavelengths is still in front of something that isn't, so while you may not be able to a guy on the street, you'd see a guy shaped hole in from of that starbucks he is walking by.
- rm_-rf_slash 11y ago
  So how does that asterisk stop someone from dropping in, taking their shots, and fleeing without any way to identify them?
  - steamer25 11y ago
    If I understand the article correctly, the material can be designed to absorb, rather than reflect, certain frequencies of electromagnetic radiation. When this occurs in the visible spectrum, we call such materials, "black". If it were really effective, clothing made from it would appear to be so dark that it couldn't get any more black--aka none more black. Existing clothing might not be quite that dark but it probably gets pretty close in terms of human visibility. The article would probably be more accurate to call this advancement a potential improvement to stealth technology since it sounds like the intent is to conceal planes from radar.