This is the most propaganda headline I've ever read.
Deep in the Pentagon, a secret AI program to find hidden nuclear missiles
81–88 of 88 posts
Re: Deep in the Pentagon, a secret AI program to find hidden nuclear missiles
#82Re: Deep in the Pentagon, a secret AI program to find hidden nuclear missiles
#83Earlier quoted context omitted.
Good point about materiél. When I wrote the GP, I tried to think of a country with wealth (and population) that lost a war due to a lack of manufacturing capacity and couldn't come up with one, so I stuck with 'wealth'. Honest question: Can anyone think of such a place? I'm not including countries that had manufacturing capacity but didn't use it for military purposes. > Smarter software will help equalize and hopefu…
Germany and Japan. The USSR and USA both completely dominated them in terms of industrial capacity. Germany in particular had about a 10-year head start in terms of weapons (strong tanks, jet fighters, assault rifles, drones, ballistic missiles) but simply could not build enough to make a difference. Japan had a large population and plenty of soldiers to spare at the end of WWII but again couldn’t compete with Allied…
I agree that Germany and Japan lost principally due to relative manufacturing capacity (though we could say they lost because their strategies didn't take that into account, particularly Germany, whose attack on Russia put them even further behind).
But I think that's a different question. I was looking for,
> a country with wealth (and population) that lost a war due to a lack of manufacturing capacity
I should have been more clear, though I think the context still conveys it: I meant, has their been a wealthy country that lost a war simply because it didn't invest in manufacturing capacity? Germany and Japan invested heavily in it, but the Allies, combined, were simply much wealthier and larger. Also, the Allied capacity in the USA wasn't reduced by bombing.
Re: Deep in the Pentagon, a secret AI program to find hidden nuclear missiles
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
Germany and Japan. The USSR and USA both completely dominated them in terms of industrial capacity. Germany in particular had about a 10-year head start in terms of weapons (strong tanks, jet fighters, assault rifles, drones, ballistic missiles) but simply could not build enough to make a difference. Japan had a large population and plenty of soldiers to spare at the end of WWII but again couldn’t compete with Allied…
I agree that Germany and Japan lost principally due to relative manufacturing capacity (though we could say they lost because their strategies didn't take that into account, particularly Germany, whose attack on Russia put them even further behind). But I think that's a different question. I was looking for, > a country with wealth (and population) that lost a war due to a lack of manufacturing capacity I should have…
There are significant questions as to whether strategic bombing was effective at all. I can't find the USAAF studies from after the war at the moment, but I've seen them here.
Re: Deep in the Pentagon, a secret AI program to find hidden nuclear missiles
#85I can only say from experience in Pakistan but culture makes it difficult for other countries to succeed if they are turning away developers for ethnic, tribal or religious reasons or for being on the autism spectrum. Not to mention the culture of never questioning authority figures making proposing new ideas much more difficult.
Re: Deep in the Pentagon, a secret AI program to find hidden nuclear missiles
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You're describing network-centric warfare ... It's from an (at least somewhat) seminal paper about 10 years old from a leading defense think tank, and others discuss it too. The paper was about the future of warfare, particularly the influence of AI and robotics, and not past doctrine. It was highly respected in the defense community, AFAIK, so perhaps we shouldn't assume that HN posters are idiots who don't know w…
Care to cite? I'd be interested in which paper you're talking about. As for the barb, I wouldn't have dropped it if you'd cited / summarized more concisely. Past some word count without citation or reference, I assume people assume that I believe my thoughts are novel (and by extension, that others haven't thought of them).
> As for the barb, I wouldn't have dropped it if you'd cited / summarized more concisely. Past some word count without citation or reference, I assume people assume that I believe my thoughts are novel (and by extension, that others haven't thought of them).
I again just want make it clear that I'm not the one who made the parent and GGP comments look idiotic.
I don't work for you, so to hell with your requirements and your reading comprehension problems.
> I assume people assume
I just had to repeat that part.
Re: Deep in the Pentagon, a secret AI program to find hidden nuclear missiles
#87> The Pentagon is in a race against China and Russia to infuse more AI into its war machine ... Much of the focus is on the U.S., China, and Russia, but I wonder who else is doing it? Several years ago, a leading thinker on the application of modern IT to the military noted that it could represent an historic change: Throughout history, military power depended mostly on the quantity of two resources, wealth and popul…
Well, definitely not the Israelis since they have such a historical record of substandard intellects.
Re: Deep in the Pentagon, a secret AI program to find hidden nuclear missiles
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't you think any of those 1970s subs have seen modernization efforts?
Have they been upgraded? Yes. Have they replaced those 1970s era engines with subs that have quieter electric drives as planned? Nope. From the open letter (linked above) by the experts: "The last concentrated investment to modernize the triad came during the Reagan administration." Even if you believe the subs are in great condition, that doesn't fix the other two fundamentally broken legs of the triad. The B-52 fle…
you do realize the ohio replacement class is literally in development right now.
> The ICBMs probably don't even work (no public evidence they do), they're in well known static silos, and have just a few minutes of "use or lose" time.
They fire off a few randomly selected minuteman IIIs every so often and the footage is typically public. maybe not perfect evidence but it is some evidence.