Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
search.informit.org
Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
1–10 of 72 posts
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#2Modern military technology seems to become too costly. Recent conflicts in the middle east seem to indicate that low-cost approaches can have some terribly effective successes against much more sophisticated militaries.
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#3Modern military technology seems to become too costly. Recent conflicts in the middle east seem to indicate that low-cost approaches can have some terribly effective successes against much more sophisticated militaries.
NB: HN frowns on general article summaries:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39187161>
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39180235>
Appropriate practice:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39213144>
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#4Funny. Induatry transformed tobbe one of the most profitable public2private transfer is not suitable to produce even more robust things.
It works perfectly however - they will propose even photovoltaic propelled tanks in the near future, just to get the money
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#5[deleted]
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#6Modern military technology seems to become too costly. Recent conflicts in the middle east seem to indicate that low-cost approaches can have some terribly effective successes against much more sophisticated militaries.
The US military has known this for a long time, it just chooses to bury its head in the sand and ignore it.
See e.g. MC02 where they lost to opfor with what was literally like a cheaply thrown together zerg rush, and then just reset the scenario for a do-over.
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#7Modern military technology seems to become too costly. Recent conflicts in the middle east seem to indicate that low-cost approaches can have some terribly effective successes against much more sophisticated militaries.
NB: HN frowns on general article summaries: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39187161 > https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39180235 > Appropriate practice: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39213144 >
[deleted]
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#8The license terms of the article seem contradictory in a way. When I download the PDF it includes an appendix stating:
> Copyright of Full Text rests with the original copyright owner and, except as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, copying this copyright material is prohibited without the permission of the owner or its exclusive licensee or agent or by way of a license from Copyright Agency Limited. For information about such licences contact Copyright Agency Limited on (02) 93947600 (ph) or (02) 93947601 (fax)
However, in the margins of the whole text and also on the appendix page'S margin it says:
> Available under a Creative Commons Attribution Licence
Does this already count as a license from Copyright Agency Limited? What does the law say about such potentially conflicting terms?
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#9Modern military technology seems to become too costly. Recent conflicts in the middle east seem to indicate that low-cost approaches can have some terribly effective successes against much more sophisticated militaries.
Modern consumer drones are of great use now - these do not cost that much but are basically only produced in China.
FPV drones can almost be crafted locally, though, using off the shelf components.
Re: Lasers or Longbows? A Paradox of Military Technology (2010)
#10Modern military technology seems to become too costly. Recent conflicts in the middle east seem to indicate that low-cost approaches can have some terribly effective successes against much more sophisticated militaries.
While Ukrainian conflict shows the opposite?