[ExI] What's Wrong With Academic Futurists?

[BillK]

On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 1:18 AM, Keith Henson wrote:
>> From: BillK
>> One big advantage the military has (or must have) is the ability to
>> stop innovations that conflict with their objectives (as specified by
>> corporate and political leaders).
>> Being able to prune disliked branches makes your own future plans more
>> predictable.
>
> Sorry, I can't buy this.
>
>

There are two ways the military / political system directs future innovation.

The first, is to provide huge funding for things that they want. e.g.
DARPA projects, university research funding, etc. This funding
attracts most researchers. Many civilian innovations are spin-offs
from military projects, going right back to radar, jet planes,
computers, emergency medical repairs, etc.

The second, (which is probably the point you object to) is stopping
innovations they don't like. This is more difficult to evaluate, as
obviously, the things stopped are not generally available. However I
can speculate a bit.

The public would probably like to buy lightweight military spec body
armour, laser guided combat weaponry, drone weapons for assassination,
and so on. The latest very powerful explosives are strictly
controlled. Civilian police forces around the world are increasingly
using military equipment and effectively becoming militarized, using
the theory of overwhelming force to deal with incidents.

Civilians are allowed to play with toys like phones, music players,
tablets to watch videos, new cars, bicycles, etc. Innovation in this
area is permitted. But just try developing something in the forbidden
areas and see what happens.


BillK