3 ms·

I suspect (but cannot point to hard numbers) that machines might actually be cheaper if you are (politically or otherwise) forced to look after your human soldi

by shabble 11y ago

I suspect (but cannot point to hard numbers) that machines might actually be cheaper if you are (politically or otherwise) forced to look after your human soldiers to a reasonable standard, especially in 1st world countries. Consider the initial training expenses, equipment, career-appropriate salary along with possibly reenlistment bonuses, along with (in the worst case) medevac, multiple complex surgeries, and lifelong treatment/disability pension for some injury. Not to mention the logistic costs of transporting them to various places around hte world, and maintaining an acceptable standard of living there. Per-machine costs would be high, but there's comparatively little training. Maintenance would be expensive, but rehab/repair decisions would be much less politically charged. Not sure how logistics costs would compare - "life-support" is probably lower, but sourcing power & spares might be greater. I wonder if anyone has done an economic analysis on this sort of thing.

kaybe 11y ago
I'm very sure there are economic analyses of this. Searching hasn't brought up details, but there are things like - the think tank "Center for a New American Security", which seems to have some influence on politics and runs studies such as http://www.cnas.org/research/us-defense-policy-and-military-operations/20yy-warfare-initiative http://www.cnas.org/research/us-defense-policy-and-military-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_a_New_American_Security https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_a_New_American_Secu... - this handbook, which seems to be published by a combination of US and French Army researchers: http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/cgsc/carl/download/csipubs/FrenchRobots.pdf http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/cgsc/carl/download/csipubs/Frenc... (do you need reading material? http://usacac.army.mil/organizations/lde/csi/pubs http://usacac.army.mil/organizations/lde/csi/pubs - wow) - This Australian publication discusses costs in an abstract way: http://www.army.gov.au/Our-future/Publications/Australian-Army-Journal/Past-editions/~/media/Files/Our%20future/LWSC%20Publications/AAJ/2006Winter/10-RoboticsInFutureLandWar.pdf http://www.army.gov.au/Our-future/Publications/Australian-Ar... All of these deal with robotics and the military. Ethics is discussed widely, but visions and plans are also given (for which a cost analysis should be necessary, but I haven't found details). Concluding, the current vision of the developed world's military seems to be to replace some humans with robots and have the rest work alongside them, giving them the most dangerous tasks. (A publication lamenting the fact that army operations can be life-threatening is somewhat ironic, by the way.) However, the previous points cited child soldiers, which are neither trained well nor do they receive the benefits you mention. So we're dealing with different contexts, and both statements make sense, IMHO.

by shabble 11y ago

kaybe 11y ago

I'm very sure there are economic analyses of this. Searching hasn't brought up details, but there are things like - the think tank "Center for a New American Security", which seems to have some influence on politics and runs studies such as http://www.cnas.org/research/us-defense-policy-and-military-operations/20yy-warfare-initiative http://www.cnas.org/research/us-defense-policy-and-military-... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_a_New_American_Security https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_a_New_American_Secu... - this handbook, which seems to be published by a combination of US and French Army researchers: http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/cgsc/carl/download/csipubs/FrenchRobots.pdf http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/cgsc/carl/download/csipubs/Frenc... (do you need reading material? http://usacac.army.mil/organizations/lde/csi/pubs http://usacac.army.mil/organizations/lde/csi/pubs - wow) - This Australian publication discusses costs in an abstract way: http://www.army.gov.au/Our-future/Publications/Australian-Army-Journal/Past-editions/~/media/Files/Our%20future/LWSC%20Publications/AAJ/2006Winter/10-RoboticsInFutureLandWar.pdf http://www.army.gov.au/Our-future/Publications/Australian-Ar... All of these deal with robotics and the military. Ethics is discussed widely, but visions and plans are also given (for which a cost analysis should be necessary, but I haven't found details). Concluding, the current vision of the developed world's military seems to be to replace some humans with robots and have the rest work alongside them, giving them the most dangerous tasks. (A publication lamenting the fact that army operations can be life-threatening is somewhat ironic, by the way.) However, the previous points cited child soldiers, which are neither trained well nor do they receive the benefits you mention. So we're dealing with different contexts, and both statements make sense, IMHO.