Canadian politicians are talking about setting up a Canadian DARPA. Tying precious research dollars to military applications is not an efficient way to innovate and will lead to obscenities like the self-healing minefield. Encourage start-ups, not the military industrial complex.
-
I didn't disagree with the tech coming out of military funding. I disagreed with the argument that these things would not exist if we didn't fund the military so heavily, which in turn funded some useful technology with some of its funding.
The question we're debating is whether an agency like DARPA is a good thing. And the answer is overwhelmingly yes. (Among other things, because otherwise the money would just have gone to more planes and tanks.)
-
-
The issue is legitimacy. Supporting DARPA gives an implicit approval to war profiteering. Secondly, innovation was driven by money, "defense" was merely medium. And we all know why it was the sole medium to flush all the money.
-
All four of those sentences are false.
- Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
-
-
"Has military funded research resulted in benefits for society?" - True "Has military funded research also resulted in harm for societies external to said country?" - Yes "Does there exist better scientific research funding models devoid of military involvement?" - Absolutely
Kiitos. Käytämme tätä aikajanasi parantamiseen. KumoaKumoa
-
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.