Live data from Hacker News

Silicon Valley is transforming the military-industrial complex? (2024)

costsofwar.watson.brown.edu

251–260 of 405 posts

Re: Silicon Valley is transforming the military-industrial complex? (2024)

#251
post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And they can redirect resources to the war if we removed it. If anything, removal of our support probably leads to the use of dumber less targeted weapons like carpet bombing or good ole white phosphorus that they’ve already demonstrated use of in past conflicts. If we were giving them 30+% of their gdp then yea, dropping that probably stops the conflict. 2% is just a budget reshuffle.

you should look up how much the 2008 financial crisis shrank the US GDP. 2% of an entire nation state's GDP especially with aid concentrated in gov\mil sectors of which a huge part of Israel's private sector is dependent on for grants is not a 'budget reshuffle'

It is when there’s an existential threat which, agree with Israel’s government or not, they believe the neighboring Islamic factions are.

I’m not claiming it would be easy but it’s definitely not an amount that losing would end the war overnight, which was the original claim I responded to

Re: Silicon Valley is transforming the military-industrial complex? (2024)

#252
post #111

Serious question: should companies not participate in contracts from their country's defense department? Or is the argument that it's only US companies which shouldn't, because the US is uniquely evil?

There is an undeniable conflict between "Don't be evil." and "Evil pays.". A lot of what militaries do can be best described as the lesser of two evils. Murdering people is bad, but sometimes a little murder can prevent a lot of murder. However ethically or unethically a state uses force, there's usually a lot of money to be had in supplying that state with the means of force. Is there room for ethics in military res…

Heavy use of cluster munitions (and land mines) was critical in allowing Ukraine to stop the second Russian invasion in 2022-2023 and stabilize the front lines. The notion that they kill civilians indiscriminately, or that it's unethical for defense contractors to build them for the US and allied militaries, is ludicrous and disconnected from objective reality.

Re: Silicon Valley is transforming the military-industrial complex? (2024)

#253
post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No need to get serious. Only a sith deals in absolutes. There's plenty of work within the us military that is definitely not evil. Even within the field of weapons development. You could say develop a target selection approach that is less likely to blow up a school halfway across the world than existing approaches. You are literally saving lives working on that project, despite what the people who only see in black…

"You could say develop a target selection approach that is less likely to blow up a school halfway across the world than existing approaches." Sure, you save some lives. Then the military realizes they can apply violence far more liberally than they ever could before. Subsequent conflicts result in a whole lot more death for the losing side. Maybe a lot more "militar-aged men" end up as cannon fodder for being in the…

There’s a story in the Christian Bible about David, Old Testament. He was told to fire arrows into the ground. He shot 3. The response he got was something like “you should have shot more, now you’ll only sack 3 cities.”

Tell me more about lives, Christianity, and war.

Re: Silicon Valley is transforming the military-industrial complex? (2024)

#254
post #252
post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is an undeniable conflict between "Don't be evil." and "Evil pays.". A lot of what militaries do can be best described as the lesser of two evils. Murdering people is bad, but sometimes a little murder can prevent a lot of murder. However ethically or unethically a state uses force, there's usually a lot of money to be had in supplying that state with the means of force. Is there room for ethics in military res…

Heavy use of cluster munitions (and land mines) was critical in allowing Ukraine to stop the second Russian invasion in 2022-2023 and stabilize the front lines. The notion that they kill civilians indiscriminately, or that it's unethical for defense contractors to build them for the US and allied militaries, is ludicrous and disconnected from objective reality.

> cluster munitions was critical in allowing Ukraine to stop the second Russian invasion in 2022

Genuinely want to read more about this. Do you have a good source?

I'd always assumed cluster munitions had no legitimate use.

Re: Silicon Valley is transforming the military-industrial complex? (2024)

#255
Hardly transforming. SV has been involved with military contracts since post-war in 1946 due solely to the efforts of Professor Fredrick Terman. Starting first with Stanford, where he taught, he started associating the engineering labs with defense programs. This soon followed by establishing Stanford Research Park and bringing on companies who soon started getting them. The man is a legend and is often referred to as the Father of Silicon Valley.

There were also established companies like Lockheed, Hughes, and Gruman and smaller start-up companies founded in the 50s, 60s, and 70s. I started working for one of these, ESL, in 1978 and worked at several others, ArgoSystems and Applied Signal Technologies, up until I retired in 2023. All were mostly involved in working with the Intel community on SIGINT and ELINT systems with other work building SIGINT into aircraft for the Services. During its heyday, late 60s to the 90s, it was nothing to change to a new company every year if you liked as long as you held a golden ticket, a special access clearance. The executive staffs of these companies were closely tied into the Government up to the White House. In fact, the founder of my first company, Dr. William Perry, served as deputy directory of defense under Carter as well as secretary of defense under Clinton.

All this mostly ended when the Cold War collapsed the Soviets. Lockheed is a shell of what it once was as it moved most of its manufacturing elsewhere, keeping only its missiles in Sunnyvale. A lot of the small companies either closed or were bought by the big boys. TRW bought ESL and was, itself bought by Grumann who then partnered with Northrup, Boeing bought ArgoSystems, and Raytheon bought my last company, Applied Signal Technologies.

So, basically, SV has been deeply invested in defense for 81 years.

Re: Silicon Valley is transforming the military-industrial complex? (2024)

#257
post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was your job at Microsoft?

I was a 68 working on consumer products, but it was still too much for me. Especially the revelation that Satya worked with the IDF to capture all Palestinian phone conversations and host them on Azure. Every day I woke up to go to work after I found that out, I was sick to my stomach. I eventually couldn't take it any more. I took a pay cut and I'm still in the tech industry working for a startup, and still facing e…

> Especially the revelation that Satya worked with the IDF to capture all Palestinian phone conversations and host them on Azure.

man imagine when you learn about what MS did to all Americans phone conversations, emails, meta data, and basically all digital communications flowing in and out of the US for the NSA.

Re: Silicon Valley is transforming the military-industrial complex? (2024)

#258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're not responding to their actual comment, you're arguing something else. As for "someone else will do it if i don't".... (aka your argument). That's true of a lot of things, and I sleep great at night choosing not to steal from people even though I know others will choose to steal. It turns out I don't have the ability to choose their actions for them, only my own.

> "someone else will do it if i don't".... (aka your argument) That's not the argument. It's more like "if I don't do it then I better hope somebody else will, otherwise my whole country will inevitably become subservient to a despotic regime". Basically, the question is whether strict pacifism is a tenable national policy in the real world. All of modern and ancient history up to this point seems to suggest it is no…

Would you define Russia not nuking Ukraine as "strict pacifism"? Because every modern country and army seems to have some basic standard of ethics and morals that restrict them from waging total war even if you want to argue that's purely for diplomatic or PR reasons.

There are a whole lot of decisions that need to be made to get from "strict pacifism" to total war, so I don't know why we need to flatten this into a binary.

Re: Silicon Valley is transforming the military-industrial complex? (2024)

#259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US stopped countless wars from starting in the first place due to deterrence. Look at Ukraine to see what happens to a country that isn't part of an alliance like NATO.

Ukraine seems to be what happens when a country willingly gave up their nukes (with US encouragement). I have no problem if the US navy wants to tool around shipping lanes for the good of global trade. I take issue with everything else. In the past couple of years, the US has implicitly used the strength of its military to threaten the sovereignty of Greenland, Panama, Canada, Mexico, and Cuba. Abducted a foreign hea…

Ukraine was storing nukes but did not have the keys to use them. They were useless to ukraine and presented no deterrent.

Re: Silicon Valley is transforming the military-industrial complex? (2024)

#260

If there's one thing that should be obvious from the war in Ukraine it is that relying on private companies is a bad idea for certain types of weapons. Specifically, for low margin weapons that you need in volume. The standout example of this from the Ukraine war is artillery shells. We should maybe have a state owned corporation for making artillery shells in America, because there does not seem to be enough profit…

> If there's one thing that should be obvious from the war in Ukraine it is that relying on private companies is a bad idea for certain types of weapons.

I’m not following how that is a lesson from Ukraine. Their drones and missiles are made by private companies.

The true lesson i think is that in times of peace (or in times of wars of choice) procurement is dominated by excercises, lab tests, and design reviews. When you are doing that it is hard to tell apart the “good enough” from the “over engineered”. To every choice you can dream up a “counter”. Some real or imagined response or tactic by your enemy which would negate your system. And then your engineers have to design some counter-counter, or harden the system somehow. This leads to complexity which leads to high cost per individual weapon.

In contrast Ukraine is fighting for their existence. If they want to know if a new weapon is good enough, they send it to the front and try it. If it hurts the enemy more than it costs great. Order more. If it stops being effective, try something else. They are not picking the weapon system which will serve them for the next decade. They are picking what is available and effective today.

Different incentives, different opportunities which lead to different choices and different outcimes. But the difference is not if they are using private companies or not.

Post reply on HN