7 ms·

Am I the only one that thinks this is very sad? Mass killing on a budget?

basementcat 2y ago
I think this is a logical consequence of miniaturization (and cost reduction) of electronic components and sensors. Signal processing algorithms (perhaps used for target tracking) can be done in software instead of custom analog electronics. I’ve been contacted by recruiters from multiple venture funded cruise missile (and related weapons systems) companies.
- WheelsAtLarge 2y ago
  If that's the case, it is only a matter of time before we all can afford our own cruise missiles. I see your point. The way I see it there's a great advantage to having big very expensive weapons, such as only a few countries can afford them and they are so expensive and destructive that leaders aren't so quick to use them.
  - defrost 2y ago
    That acts as a deterrent to big actions, nuclear nation Vs nuclear nation in direct conflict World War scale confrontations. As the entire post WWII Cold War era and recent post 9/11 decades have shown, however, is that big expensive weapons that destroy entire cities in a single package have done little to stop endless low level warring. Small conflicts continue none the less, the US invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan, the Russian actions in Syria, the Crimean and Ukraine invasions, etc. (many many other "et cetera's"). A Chinese expansion to take Tawain would be of a similar "small" scale from the PoV of "does this warrent a nuclear response". It would be a naval battle in many ways and the best deterrance, perhaps, is an over supply of "cheap" semi autonomous self guiding over the horizon evasive ship killer missiles. The knowledge that any ships that engage could be rapidly removed from the board is the very thing that might see such usage not come to pass.
  - Teever 2y ago
    I've been trying to find it for years but about 20 years ago when that guy from New Zealand was trying to build his own cruise missile for under $20k I found a DoD paper that had a line I'll paraphrase that stood out to me: 'the DIY cruise missile will become the AK-47 of the 21st century'
  - Animats 2y ago
    > If that's the case, it is only a matter of time before we all can afford our own cruise missiles. What do we do when the Sinaloa cartel gets the capability to attack LA? They're already heavily involved in preventing the election of officials opposed to them.[1] [1] https://apnews.com/article/mexico-drug-cartels-violence-elections-43b1689bff1b38c68e8428a74c2e9a83 https://apnews.com/article/mexico-drug-cartels-violence-elec...
    - jcgrillo 2y ago
      They have such an ability right now. They could easily get a fleet of quarter scale R/C aircraft with autonomous control ala pixhawk, load them up with explosives and fuel, and send them on a one way trip to the big city. Maybe $5-10k ea. The first attack would likely be very successful, because nobody is ready for it. Expect effectiveness to degrade over time as air defense systems and fighters are deployed. I wouldn't expect them to do this, though, because anyone contemplating such a thing would realize the response would be immediate and decisive. Cartels are after all business organizations, and you can't do business if you're spending all your time dodging hellfire missiles.
      - mrkstu 2y ago
        Yep. A 9-11 Afgan style response would be much easier when the perps are literally next door.
    - basementcat 2y ago
      This may create a market opportunity for "personal Iron Dome" like products. Perhaps it’s not too late to apply for the next YC opportunity?
      - bigiain 2y ago
        Bay Area gated communities, with Google and Facebook shuttle buses, and anti cruise missile defence systems built by YC funded "peace" startups. Be right back, quickly buying up some realestate...
carabiner 2y ago
I think it's incredible how the tech industry has turned from "don't be evil" to supporting all manner of vices. On Twitter, SV VC's openly support Trump, and not just Peter Thiel. They're just corrupted and went from counter-culture to accelerating all of the old power structures.
- Log_out_ 2y ago
  maybe they just goto know the alternatives behind the hippy veil and they are ugly old landempires using idiots.
remarkEon 2y ago
You are not the only one, which is an interesting commentary on how far the Arsenal of democracy has fallen.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- EasyMark 2y ago
  Other than the US and maybe England does anyone else in the “western democracies” have any more than some high tech gizmos in short supply that military economy Russia can’t overcome with their 50’s and 60s style warfare? I didn’t agree with 95%of what Trump said but I did agree with him trying to push for NATO countries to get on the ball and remilitarize because Russia is running their economy on war and oil now and Europes seems to be in lala land
  - remarkEon 2y ago
    England has no real defense industry to speak of. They no longer have the ability to produce the steal needed for e.g. surface ships, they have to import it. Germany still has the ingredients for a defense industrial base, and so does France. Trump, well, he's right on this one. There's a pretty serious free-rider problem that's been festering since the Berlin wall fell.
throw0982345 2y ago
[flagged]
zaptrem 2y ago
The alternatives are sadder: 1. We stick with the current wasteful and expensive models and have less money for everything else the government does. 2. We don't buy cruise missiles at all and Putin and friends gleefully march across eastern Europe/whatever land they believe is theirs.
- fnord77 2y ago
  we'll spend the same amount of money, we'll just have more weapons
AYBABTME 2y ago
It's good to have a moral compass that dislikes the concept of war. But we shouldn't confuse that for an effective strategy to deter violence. In a complex world that continues to have ideological challenges, economic constraints and susceptibility to coercion by violent thugs (Putin), forgiving weapons supremacy is betrayal of our peaceful ideals, families, neighbours. Anti-weapons as a policy to achieve peace is quite an incomplete train of thought.
- nickpinkston 2y ago
  Well said
brigadier132 2y ago
It's sad in the same way it's sad that we still have war. Doesn't mean it isn't necessary.
SkyPuncher 2y ago
The Ukraine-Russia war largely changed my opinion on this type of stuff. War is still the ultimate leverage. A hostile nation deciding to take you out forces you to defend yourself. Russia has shown that quantity largely outweighs quality. I see two reasons for this: 1. Quantity can exhaust supplies. It’s hard to defend yourself when you’re out of ammo or people. 2. Quality is concentrated. It’s easier to destroy and be done with. This type of tech is the future of defense and deterrence. Being able to send hundreds or thousands of smaller drones ensures at least some make it through.
- Log_out_ 2y ago
  And the final step is component standardization at the dimensions and interface level.build new cheap systems on the fly using automation and cheap standardized subcomponents. 3 batteries, 1gyro, 1 motor,1 cpu, 1 explosive , wrap it in shrinkwrap,firmware + mission upload and every one can buy it, every can use it, end of world, MOSAICs Forgot the camera. Basically push a cellphone into standardized brick, not to unsimilar too industrial plc bus cards. ps:in picture a bigdog like system built by lego of death: https://github.com/PicassoCT/MOSAIC/blob/master/luaui/images/loadpictures/LoadScreen14.png https://github.com/PicassoCT/MOSAIC/blob/master/luaui/images... pss no reason to not build cruise missile like systems from the same lego.
  - Log_out_ 2y ago
    bonus points if you can triangulate the powersource == fuel == explosives equation
- LorenPechtel 2y ago
  Yup. Look at what's happening in the Black Sea. Russia has a big hammer. It can unquestionably kill a target it decides to kill and Ukraine is basically powerless to prevent that. Ukraine has pinpricks. They have to wait for the best conditions to attack and have no certainty as to whether they can kill their target or not. But the Russian ships can't be wily all the time, they have to sometimes be sitting ducks. And the only weapons Russia has that can engage those sea drones is guns. I believe that in reality you need some of each. Quality fights quality, quantity fights quantity. Quantity does very little against big quality, but big quality does very little against quantity. You want to knock down that LORASM that your radar just picked out of terrain? You need something that can get there fast, drones won't do it.
cm2012 2y ago
If you want peace, you have to be prepared for war. Otherwise, those who did prepare for war can do whatever they want to you and your country.
- shmerl 2y ago
  Si vis pacem, para bellum.
tomjen3 2y ago
In the best world we wouldn't need guns. In this world, we do. The sad thing for me is whom it is used on and whom it is not.
globalnode 2y ago
I agree it is very sad. Not enough effort on de-escalation, negotiation and understanding. And with a stockpile of cheap weapons it will be ever easier for greedy, lazy, corrupt and cowardly policy makers to simply press a button and hope it gets them what they want. It won't though.
- Log_out_ 2y ago
  yeah, more surrender to aggressive dictatorships by 'change through trade'. right now someone is bleeding out in ukraine because you peaceniks had your way for thirty years. bloody handed well spoken monsters in a world they want to leave ...
  - LorenPechtel 2y ago
    Peaceniks had their way for thirty years?!?! The Ukraine war is not due to peaceniks. Had the hawks been in charge we would be in pretty much the same situation as we are now. Up until 2014 there is nothing any reasonable hawk would have done differently with Ukraine. Even after they had their come-to-Jesus moment and cleaned up their act there's still little more we could have done. We were helping them get their military in order, what else was there to do? I do think the peaceniks are very wrong in saying it could have been avoided by diplomacy, but that doesn't mean they caused the war.
    - Log_out_ 2y ago
      The blatant nature of land empire of "grab all you can get ,never let go, lie through your teeth,assume everyone else is a lying land empire also " was visible even during the fall of the sovjet union in grosny , the various border raids of china into its neighbors (vietnam), and the various persian proxy wars. but the problem was that dove liberal future optimism incompetence infected a whole generation of politicians. including the "warmongery" group around bush junior . which removed one landempire containing another from the map and just ignored the other unreformables while they staged blatant psyops.
- hcfman 2y ago
boxed 2y ago
Now that the crossbow is invented, war is too cheap and deadly to be viable.. said a Pope at the time.
egorfine 2y ago
I was thinking exactly the same. But then war came to my home in Kiev. Problem is, no matter how deep are your philosophical thoughts on arms and peace, there are countries that just want to kill you, plain and simple. In order to have the ability to continue being concerned on the spending on mass killing, you have to be ready to physically defend your favorite Starbucks.
- gangorgasm 2y ago
  > you have to be ready to physically defend your favorite Starbucks. Well ... they have a new 'super commuting" CEO if that helps
markovs_gun 2y ago
I agree somewhat, but I would like to point out that a huge portion of the cost of advanced weapons systems is waste intentionally baked into the processes of designing, manufacturing, and testing these systems to squeeze as much money out of governments as possible. This sort of thing has huge potential benefits for tax payers everywhere
EasyMark 2y ago
I think only those who make money off of war “like it”. The rest of us who are pro military simply see it as the only way. Diplomacy will only get you so far and if you don’t have a big pile of bombs to back it up then your diplomacy is worthless against a power hungry fool like Putin. All they understand is loss of power or gaining of power, nothing else registers in the brains.

I think this is a logical consequence of miniaturization (and cost reduction) of electronic components and sensors. Signal processing algorithms (perhaps used for target tracking) can be done in software instead of custom analog electronics. I’ve been contacted by recruiters from multiple venture funded cruise missile (and related weapons systems) companies.

WheelsAtLarge 2y ago
If that's the case, it is only a matter of time before we all can afford our own cruise missiles. I see your point. The way I see it there's a great advantage to having big very expensive weapons, such as only a few countries can afford them and they are so expensive and destructive that leaders aren't so quick to use them.
- defrost 2y ago
  That acts as a deterrent to big actions, nuclear nation Vs nuclear nation in direct conflict World War scale confrontations. As the entire post WWII Cold War era and recent post 9/11 decades have shown, however, is that big expensive weapons that destroy entire cities in a single package have done little to stop endless low level warring. Small conflicts continue none the less, the US invasions of Iraq, Afghanistan, the Russian actions in Syria, the Crimean and Ukraine invasions, etc. (many many other "et cetera's"). A Chinese expansion to take Tawain would be of a similar "small" scale from the PoV of "does this warrent a nuclear response". It would be a naval battle in many ways and the best deterrance, perhaps, is an over supply of "cheap" semi autonomous self guiding over the horizon evasive ship killer missiles. The knowledge that any ships that engage could be rapidly removed from the board is the very thing that might see such usage not come to pass.
- Teever 2y ago
  I've been trying to find it for years but about 20 years ago when that guy from New Zealand was trying to build his own cruise missile for under $20k I found a DoD paper that had a line I'll paraphrase that stood out to me: 'the DIY cruise missile will become the AK-47 of the 21st century'
- Animats 2y ago
  > If that's the case, it is only a matter of time before we all can afford our own cruise missiles. What do we do when the Sinaloa cartel gets the capability to attack LA? They're already heavily involved in preventing the election of officials opposed to them.[1] [1] https://apnews.com/article/mexico-drug-cartels-violence-elections-43b1689bff1b38c68e8428a74c2e9a83 https://apnews.com/article/mexico-drug-cartels-violence-elec...
  - jcgrillo 2y ago
    They have such an ability right now. They could easily get a fleet of quarter scale R/C aircraft with autonomous control ala pixhawk, load them up with explosives and fuel, and send them on a one way trip to the big city. Maybe $5-10k ea. The first attack would likely be very successful, because nobody is ready for it. Expect effectiveness to degrade over time as air defense systems and fighters are deployed. I wouldn't expect them to do this, though, because anyone contemplating such a thing would realize the response would be immediate and decisive. Cartels are after all business organizations, and you can't do business if you're spending all your time dodging hellfire missiles.
    - mrkstu 2y ago
      Yep. A 9-11 Afgan style response would be much easier when the perps are literally next door.
  - basementcat 2y ago
    This may create a market opportunity for "personal Iron Dome" like products. Perhaps it’s not too late to apply for the next YC opportunity?
    - bigiain 2y ago
      Bay Area gated communities, with Google and Facebook shuttle buses, and anti cruise missile defence systems built by YC funded "peace" startups. Be right back, quickly buying up some realestate...

carabiner 2y ago

I think it's incredible how the tech industry has turned from "don't be evil" to supporting all manner of vices. On Twitter, SV VC's openly support Trump, and not just Peter Thiel. They're just corrupted and went from counter-culture to accelerating all of the old power structures.

Log_out_ 2y ago
maybe they just goto know the alternatives behind the hippy veil and they are ugly old landempires using idiots.

remarkEon 2y ago

You are not the only one, which is an interesting commentary on how far the Arsenal of democracy has fallen.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
EasyMark 2y ago
Other than the US and maybe England does anyone else in the “western democracies” have any more than some high tech gizmos in short supply that military economy Russia can’t overcome with their 50’s and 60s style warfare? I didn’t agree with 95%of what Trump said but I did agree with him trying to push for NATO countries to get on the ball and remilitarize because Russia is running their economy on war and oil now and Europes seems to be in lala land
- remarkEon 2y ago
  England has no real defense industry to speak of. They no longer have the ability to produce the steal needed for e.g. surface ships, they have to import it. Germany still has the ingredients for a defense industrial base, and so does France. Trump, well, he's right on this one. There's a pretty serious free-rider problem that's been festering since the Berlin wall fell.

throw0982345 2y ago

[flagged]

zaptrem 2y ago

The alternatives are sadder: 1. We stick with the current wasteful and expensive models and have less money for everything else the government does. 2. We don't buy cruise missiles at all and Putin and friends gleefully march across eastern Europe/whatever land they believe is theirs.

fnord77 2y ago
we'll spend the same amount of money, we'll just have more weapons

AYBABTME 2y ago

It's good to have a moral compass that dislikes the concept of war. But we shouldn't confuse that for an effective strategy to deter violence. In a complex world that continues to have ideological challenges, economic constraints and susceptibility to coercion by violent thugs (Putin), forgiving weapons supremacy is betrayal of our peaceful ideals, families, neighbours. Anti-weapons as a policy to achieve peace is quite an incomplete train of thought.

nickpinkston 2y ago
Well said

brigadier132 2y ago

It's sad in the same way it's sad that we still have war. Doesn't mean it isn't necessary.

SkyPuncher 2y ago

The Ukraine-Russia war largely changed my opinion on this type of stuff. War is still the ultimate leverage. A hostile nation deciding to take you out forces you to defend yourself. Russia has shown that quantity largely outweighs quality. I see two reasons for this: 1. Quantity can exhaust supplies. It’s hard to defend yourself when you’re out of ammo or people. 2. Quality is concentrated. It’s easier to destroy and be done with. This type of tech is the future of defense and deterrence. Being able to send hundreds or thousands of smaller drones ensures at least some make it through.

Log_out_ 2y ago
And the final step is component standardization at the dimensions and interface level.build new cheap systems on the fly using automation and cheap standardized subcomponents. 3 batteries, 1gyro, 1 motor,1 cpu, 1 explosive , wrap it in shrinkwrap,firmware + mission upload and every one can buy it, every can use it, end of world, MOSAICs Forgot the camera. Basically push a cellphone into standardized brick, not to unsimilar too industrial plc bus cards. ps:in picture a bigdog like system built by lego of death: https://github.com/PicassoCT/MOSAIC/blob/master/luaui/images/loadpictures/LoadScreen14.png https://github.com/PicassoCT/MOSAIC/blob/master/luaui/images... pss no reason to not build cruise missile like systems from the same lego.
- Log_out_ 2y ago
  bonus points if you can triangulate the powersource == fuel == explosives equation
LorenPechtel 2y ago
Yup. Look at what's happening in the Black Sea. Russia has a big hammer. It can unquestionably kill a target it decides to kill and Ukraine is basically powerless to prevent that. Ukraine has pinpricks. They have to wait for the best conditions to attack and have no certainty as to whether they can kill their target or not. But the Russian ships can't be wily all the time, they have to sometimes be sitting ducks. And the only weapons Russia has that can engage those sea drones is guns. I believe that in reality you need some of each. Quality fights quality, quantity fights quantity. Quantity does very little against big quality, but big quality does very little against quantity. You want to knock down that LORASM that your radar just picked out of terrain? You need something that can get there fast, drones won't do it.

cm2012 2y ago

If you want peace, you have to be prepared for war. Otherwise, those who did prepare for war can do whatever they want to you and your country.

shmerl 2y ago
Si vis pacem, para bellum.

tomjen3 2y ago

In the best world we wouldn't need guns. In this world, we do. The sad thing for me is whom it is used on and whom it is not.

globalnode 2y ago

I agree it is very sad. Not enough effort on de-escalation, negotiation and understanding. And with a stockpile of cheap weapons it will be ever easier for greedy, lazy, corrupt and cowardly policy makers to simply press a button and hope it gets them what they want. It won't though.

Log_out_ 2y ago
yeah, more surrender to aggressive dictatorships by 'change through trade'. right now someone is bleeding out in ukraine because you peaceniks had your way for thirty years. bloody handed well spoken monsters in a world they want to leave ...
- LorenPechtel 2y ago
  Peaceniks had their way for thirty years?!?! The Ukraine war is not due to peaceniks. Had the hawks been in charge we would be in pretty much the same situation as we are now. Up until 2014 there is nothing any reasonable hawk would have done differently with Ukraine. Even after they had their come-to-Jesus moment and cleaned up their act there's still little more we could have done. We were helping them get their military in order, what else was there to do? I do think the peaceniks are very wrong in saying it could have been avoided by diplomacy, but that doesn't mean they caused the war.
  - Log_out_ 2y ago
    The blatant nature of land empire of "grab all you can get ,never let go, lie through your teeth,assume everyone else is a lying land empire also " was visible even during the fall of the sovjet union in grosny , the various border raids of china into its neighbors (vietnam), and the various persian proxy wars. but the problem was that dove liberal future optimism incompetence infected a whole generation of politicians. including the "warmongery" group around bush junior . which removed one landempire containing another from the map and just ignored the other unreformables while they staged blatant psyops.
hcfman 2y ago

boxed 2y ago

Now that the crossbow is invented, war is too cheap and deadly to be viable.. said a Pope at the time.

egorfine 2y ago

I was thinking exactly the same. But then war came to my home in Kiev. Problem is, no matter how deep are your philosophical thoughts on arms and peace, there are countries that just want to kill you, plain and simple. In order to have the ability to continue being concerned on the spending on mass killing, you have to be ready to physically defend your favorite Starbucks.

gangorgasm 2y ago
> you have to be ready to physically defend your favorite Starbucks. Well ... they have a new 'super commuting" CEO if that helps

markovs_gun 2y ago

I agree somewhat, but I would like to point out that a huge portion of the cost of advanced weapons systems is waste intentionally baked into the processes of designing, manufacturing, and testing these systems to squeeze as much money out of governments as possible. This sort of thing has huge potential benefits for tax payers everywhere

EasyMark 2y ago

I think only those who make money off of war “like it”. The rest of us who are pro military simply see it as the only way. Diplomacy will only get you so far and if you don’t have a big pile of bombs to back it up then your diplomacy is worthless against a power hungry fool like Putin. All they understand is loss of power or gaining of power, nothing else registers in the brains.