4 ms·

Is this really any of DARPA's business? Aren't they supposed to be a defence research agency? When did they start feeling responsible for the US manufacturing e

by hristov 17y ago

Is this really any of DARPA's business? Aren't they supposed to be a defence research agency? When did they start feeling responsible for the US manufacturing economy. And why do they think they have the sufficient knowledge and ability to reform the US economy? I mean if those manufacturing methods were more efficient, then wouldn't the economy change by itself then?

argv_empty 17y ago
When did they start feeling responsible for the US manufacturing economy. In war, it probably helps a country to be able to produce a lot of guns, tanks, ships, etc.
akadien 17y ago
This seems better suited for the Department of Commerce or a public-private consortium. As much as I respect DARPA, they seem to have lost too much focus on their core mission over the past ten years or so. An exception is Urban Challenge.
anigbrowl 17y ago
GTFO my ARPAnet, then. Seriously, DARPA has always invested blue-sky technology with the aim of securing a long-term strategic advantage for the US. Just think of the impact (ie cost savings) that a general-purpose manufacturing infrastructure could have for defense procurement, never mind the wider world of business. I see significant strategic value in this, and think DARPA has more than justified its existence as an incubator for new technology rather than being a subsidy dump.
alan-crowe 17y ago
I think that the future for check points on roads is that the soldiers stay safe in the blockhouse remotely controlling androids that look in the trunk of the car. Urban warfare will undergo a similar transformation. The soldiers stay in the armoured car operating the remote controls. The android kicks in the door, goes into the house and is blown to pieces by the booby trap. In this scenario America is no longer constrained by human casualties but is instead constrained by the manufacturing capacity to make up loses of robot warriors.

by hristov 17y ago

argv_empty 17y ago

When did they start feeling responsible for the US manufacturing economy. In war, it probably helps a country to be able to produce a lot of guns, tanks, ships, etc.

akadien 17y ago

This seems better suited for the Department of Commerce or a public-private consortium. As much as I respect DARPA, they seem to have lost too much focus on their core mission over the past ten years or so. An exception is Urban Challenge.

anigbrowl 17y ago

GTFO my ARPAnet, then. Seriously, DARPA has always invested blue-sky technology with the aim of securing a long-term strategic advantage for the US. Just think of the impact (ie cost savings) that a general-purpose manufacturing infrastructure could have for defense procurement, never mind the wider world of business. I see significant strategic value in this, and think DARPA has more than justified its existence as an incubator for new technology rather than being a subsidy dump.

alan-crowe 17y ago

I think that the future for check points on roads is that the soldiers stay safe in the blockhouse remotely controlling androids that look in the trunk of the car. Urban warfare will undergo a similar transformation. The soldiers stay in the armoured car operating the remote controls. The android kicks in the door, goes into the house and is blown to pieces by the booby trap. In this scenario America is no longer constrained by human casualties but is instead constrained by the manufacturing capacity to make up loses of robot warriors.