5 ms·
Still, the problem with having occupation-style technology and drones is that it further spreads the power of those with capital at the expense of those without
by astine 12y ago
Still, the problem with having occupation-style technology and drones is that it further spreads the power of those with capital at the expense of those without.
Are we certain that this is a bad thing. I personally like that it requires the resources of a nation-state to field a major military. The whole 'democratization of war' that happened during the twentieth century is arguably the reason why we see constant, brutal, civil war certain parts of the world. If we could undo the invention of the Kalashnikov the world would be so much better.
- darkmighty 12y agoThe point stands that as you diminish the number of people needed to make aggressive decisions those scenarios can become more unstable / risky (as in risk of unethical orders). It's the same case as with nuclear weapons. But it's not an insurmountable problem: simply delegating the decision to more and/or better prepared individuals is the way to go. The dangers and benefits in fact are strikingly analogous to nuclear weapons technology: the power will eventually overwhelm conventional warfare and major nations would probably only fight proxy wars up with robots, and stop immediately when the robotic resources depleted to prevent assured destruction. It could create the sort of calm that nuclear weapons bring. And precautions must be assigned the same way (multi-person authorization, strict safety, etc).
- soperj 12y agoIf these existed in the late 1700s, no way that US colonists can declare independence.
- BatFastard 12y agoWhat Kalashnikov designed was powered by inevitability. If he hadn't done it someone else would. Just like with the robots, someone somewhere WILL make them. I do fear the ability that these give leaders to wage war with no cost other then money.