4 ms·

Why do people venerate war machines? I understand the interest, but putting money into it? Surely there are better places that money can go.

sdinsn 6y ago
You can ask that about pretty much every luxury good and hobby. The simple answer is that people do what interests them, not what is "better" (according to whatever your biased perspective is) for the world.
- monadic2 6y ago
  There’s no way you can pass off a fighter jet as a “hobby”. That’s intentional neglect of society at that point, and again to venerate a weapon.
  - bdefore 6y ago
    It gets gray real fast. The Internet as we know it grew out of military research to maintain communication channels during nuclear war.
    - monadic2 6y ago
      I’m not sure what your point is—the internet always had wider applicability than war. Anyway, that neglects the point that both a MiG and military investment have piss-poor returns and you might as well burn the cash. Like how hard is it to invest in the people around you? What goes wrong in your life where you spend on a fucking MiG rather than feeding people? It’s sociopathic behavior.
      - RandomBacon 6y ago
        Why are you here instead of out volunteering. Why are you using a computer when it could be sold to feed people. I have a feeling you're starting to break the rules of this site. I'm not going to bother replying anymore.
        monadic2 6y ago
        I have no issues actually doing the things you’re mocking. I’m very secure in my own ability to contribute to society. Oh god not the rules! How will this produce complacent founders?
    - influx 6y ago
      Agreed, also the Space Race wasn't started because the US was embarrassed the Soviets could put up a satellite, it was because once you can launch a satellite, you can launch a nuclear bomb anywhere in the world.
  - stickfigure 6y ago
    I'd rather live in a world with a few people wasting wealth on frivolous hobbies than in a world with judgy busybodies scrutinizing my personal expenses.
    - monadic2 6y ago
      Thankfully it’s not up for individuals to decide.
  - RandomBacon 6y ago
    It's just a "jet" at this point, there's nothing "fighter" about it anymore.
  - stanski 6y ago
    That would only be true if he were restoring in order to shoot down other aircraft.
  - rspeele 6y ago
    It seems like there's two parts to your disapproval. 1. Effort is expended that could be allocated towards helping the poor, hungry, and sick. (Money being an abstraction layer over "effort"). This is immoral. This is also true of every leisure activity and many jobs including the creation of art, music, and literature. You may wish to argue against all of those things but "all leisure is sin" will find little support, as most people want there to be something to enjoy in life. 2. Because this plane was created for war it is a dirty, ugly thing that should be discarded. That's a matter of personal opinion. Some people will agree, but there are reasons not to. Just off the top of my head: * Preserving this preserves a historical artifact. Keeping this plane in flying condition enables people today to see what it was like in use. It is important both as a part of cultural history (the cold war) and technical history (as an engineering development) * There is beauty in a well-built machine. Jet aircraft are awe-inspiring in general. A fighter is built not only to carry weapons but for great speed and maneuverability. Disarmed, it still has an appeal far greater than a Gulfstream. It is like comparing an F1 car to a Toyota Camry. The latter is a lot more practical, but the former was built to do the extreme. * It's a fighter, not a gas chamber. It's a weapon specifically designed to fight other warplanes and to get shot back at. Somebody flying a plane like this in a war is a target as often as they are an aggressor. It might have kept the guy flying it alive under fire.
    - monadic2 6y ago
      Yup there’s that sociopathic alienation that’s normalized in the tech industry.
      - rspeele 6y ago
        Can you elaborate on what that means?
        monadic2 6y ago
        You’ve provided a standard list of values that are apparently worth more than human life.
  - sdinsn 6y ago
    Is it a weapon if it has no weapon capabilities? Its just a fast plane. Also, weapons can still be a hobby. It sounds like his hobby is both aerospace engineering and sports flying, which sounds like a fun combination in my opinion.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

sdinsn 6y ago

You can ask that about pretty much every luxury good and hobby. The simple answer is that people do what interests them, not what is "better" (according to whatever your biased perspective is) for the world.

monadic2 6y ago
There’s no way you can pass off a fighter jet as a “hobby”. That’s intentional neglect of society at that point, and again to venerate a weapon.
- bdefore 6y ago
  It gets gray real fast. The Internet as we know it grew out of military research to maintain communication channels during nuclear war.
  - monadic2 6y ago
    I’m not sure what your point is—the internet always had wider applicability than war. Anyway, that neglects the point that both a MiG and military investment have piss-poor returns and you might as well burn the cash. Like how hard is it to invest in the people around you? What goes wrong in your life where you spend on a fucking MiG rather than feeding people? It’s sociopathic behavior.
    - RandomBacon 6y ago
      Why are you here instead of out volunteering. Why are you using a computer when it could be sold to feed people. I have a feeling you're starting to break the rules of this site. I'm not going to bother replying anymore.
      - monadic2 6y ago
        I have no issues actually doing the things you’re mocking. I’m very secure in my own ability to contribute to society. Oh god not the rules! How will this produce complacent founders?
  - influx 6y ago
    Agreed, also the Space Race wasn't started because the US was embarrassed the Soviets could put up a satellite, it was because once you can launch a satellite, you can launch a nuclear bomb anywhere in the world.
- stickfigure 6y ago
  I'd rather live in a world with a few people wasting wealth on frivolous hobbies than in a world with judgy busybodies scrutinizing my personal expenses.
  - monadic2 6y ago
    Thankfully it’s not up for individuals to decide.
- RandomBacon 6y ago
  It's just a "jet" at this point, there's nothing "fighter" about it anymore.
- stanski 6y ago
  That would only be true if he were restoring in order to shoot down other aircraft.
- rspeele 6y ago
  It seems like there's two parts to your disapproval. 1. Effort is expended that could be allocated towards helping the poor, hungry, and sick. (Money being an abstraction layer over "effort"). This is immoral. This is also true of every leisure activity and many jobs including the creation of art, music, and literature. You may wish to argue against all of those things but "all leisure is sin" will find little support, as most people want there to be something to enjoy in life. 2. Because this plane was created for war it is a dirty, ugly thing that should be discarded. That's a matter of personal opinion. Some people will agree, but there are reasons not to. Just off the top of my head: * Preserving this preserves a historical artifact. Keeping this plane in flying condition enables people today to see what it was like in use. It is important both as a part of cultural history (the cold war) and technical history (as an engineering development) * There is beauty in a well-built machine. Jet aircraft are awe-inspiring in general. A fighter is built not only to carry weapons but for great speed and maneuverability. Disarmed, it still has an appeal far greater than a Gulfstream. It is like comparing an F1 car to a Toyota Camry. The latter is a lot more practical, but the former was built to do the extreme. * It's a fighter, not a gas chamber. It's a weapon specifically designed to fight other warplanes and to get shot back at. Somebody flying a plane like this in a war is a target as often as they are an aggressor. It might have kept the guy flying it alive under fire.
  - monadic2 6y ago
    Yup there’s that sociopathic alienation that’s normalized in the tech industry.
    - rspeele 6y ago
      Can you elaborate on what that means?
      - monadic2 6y ago
        You’ve provided a standard list of values that are apparently worth more than human life.
- sdinsn 6y ago
  Is it a weapon if it has no weapon capabilities? Its just a fast plane. Also, weapons can still be a hobby. It sounds like his hobby is both aerospace engineering and sports flying, which sounds like a fun combination in my opinion.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]