Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ukrainian drone holds position for 6 weeks

defenceleaders.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 204 posts

Re: Ukrainian drone holds position for 6 weeks

#111

Post by aogaili »

nemomarx wrote: post #107
aogaili wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A disrupted global consensus-based algorithm.

Do you have a good suggestion for how to get the next superpower to agree to that kind of thing? I think the most likely outcome is that their allies will be allowed to do genocides where they want, and boycotts and blockades will only work on their enemies, probably.

I think will it will emerge as we get into multilateral world order. Given that those drones depends on global supply chains, satellite images, natural resources across the world, we could imagine that a in multilateral world, if the bigger players decide to pull the plug on the economic supply and/or supply drones themselves, the war is over for the smaller players. Therefore, we either have a global war or a mechanism of conflict resolution that we never seen before or we only saw in sci-fi movies and video games.

Re: Ukrainian drone holds position for 6 weeks

#112

Post by aogaili »

gambiting wrote: post #104
aogaili wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, because they reject the idea of making a war a physical video games of drones, therefore, they would be advocating keeping the current system? My point was that we are better off with abstracting away the war, so if you downvote that idea, then you want to keep the current system, and to win a war in the current system you need total surrender, which comes at a huge cost of life. You got it?

No, I downvoted your idea that somehow we "don't allow" genocide and yet Israel killed over 20k children in Gaza and literally nothing happened to anyone as a result - the downvote is on the blatantly untrue assumption that doesn't seem to relate to the real world at all. I still don't understand why you think this implies that I support genocide, when the exact opposite is true?

You didn't understand my point. I said in the future (not now) the world might trend to having wars similar to those of playing video games. And I said this might be better because we just give politicians another medium for conflict resolution.

But you downvoted the idea, so you either don't like it or didn't understand. I assumed you understood it, but it seems you didn't

Re: Ukrainian drone holds position for 6 weeks

#113

Post by aogaili »

ncruces wrote: post #109
aogaili wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The majority of nations? majority of people on earth? We are going to a multilateral world and to win a war you need secure the appeal of majority. If the majority think your war is illegal they can cut you off from the world economy. It is a distributed consensus-based algorithm, and the young people who are writing those algorithms will shape the future of governance.

The majority of the world thinks the Russia-Ukraine war is illegal. The majority of the world thinks the Israeli/US-Iran war is illegal.

You are arguing today. This is the first kind of wars we are seeing of this nature.

But Iran is hitting exactly where it hurts, global supply chain, and now the US will be pressured by the global economy to either retreat or commit a genocide.

And if all the war was drones and anti-drones today (which is not) we would have saved many lives. Look at UAE/Iran, UAE lost no live despite being hammered with drones/missiles, this is an example of drones/anti-drones future. The reason why we don't have this with the US, is because the US needs a defeat for the legacy system to die, and it seems they will get that defeat soon. Actually they are already defeated, Trump said he is retreating in 3 weeks while achieving nothing but destruction.

Re: Ukrainian drone holds position for 6 weeks

#114

Post by watwut »

aogaili wrote: post #68
neonstatic wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> abstract it away and play video game? What happens when one side wins? In the real world, they actually win. In the video game, nothing happens > In the near future, war might be about who can build faster/better and hit the other economy more effectively In other words, in the near future it might work the exact way it has always worked. > they could easily kill the people, but other nations won't allow it, so it…

Yes, but it not like before. We (as humans) are getting more strict about losing people's life. We don't allow genocide, we don't allow colonization and enslavement, at least the majority of nations agree that this is not acceptable. So it is NOT like before. And the logical conclusion, as those drones get better and more widely adopted, is that war will be nothing more a video game with real economics and supply cha…

Ukrainian invasion was attempt at genocide and colonization. Israel did anoyher genocide last year. And then there is yemen which may not be genocide, I dunno, but has super high unchecked amount of victims. Saudi made sure no one is watching.

And they all get away with it.

Re: Ukrainian drone holds position for 6 weeks

#115

Post by watwut »

aogaili wrote: post #112
gambiting wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I downvoted your idea that somehow we "don't allow" genocide and yet Israel killed over 20k children in Gaza and literally nothing happened to anyone as a result - the downvote is on the blatantly untrue assumption that doesn't seem to relate to the real world at all. I still don't understand why you think this implies that I support genocide, when the exact opposite is true?

You didn't understand my point. I said in the future (not now) the world might trend to having wars similar to those of playing video games. And I said this might be better because we just give politicians another medium for conflict resolution. But you downvoted the idea, so you either don't like it or didn't understand. I assumed you understood it, but it seems you didn't

It is as plausible as countries handling wars by boxing match.

Re: Ukrainian drone holds position for 6 weeks

#116

Post by gambiting »

aogaili wrote: post #112
gambiting wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I downvoted your idea that somehow we "don't allow" genocide and yet Israel killed over 20k children in Gaza and literally nothing happened to anyone as a result - the downvote is on the blatantly untrue assumption that doesn't seem to relate to the real world at all. I still don't understand why you think this implies that I support genocide, when the exact opposite is true?

You didn't understand my point. I said in the future (not now) the world might trend to having wars similar to those of playing video games. And I said this might be better because we just give politicians another medium for conflict resolution. But you downvoted the idea, so you either don't like it or didn't understand. I assumed you understood it, but it seems you didn't

>>We (as humans) are getting more strict about losing people's life. We don't allow genocide, we don't allow colonization and enslavement, at least the majority of nations agree that this is not acceptable.

I downvoted because I don't find this quoted sentence true, realistic or even remotely plausible. I will repeat for the 4th time now that I don't understand why you seem to think that downvoting you means supporting genocide - you seem to be very fixated on that idea.

>>But you downvoted the idea

I did not - I thought I made it clear in my last comment.

Re: Ukrainian drone holds position for 6 weeks

#117

Post by iamnothere »

aogaili wrote: post #101
iamnothere wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people are downvoting you because your post displays extreme disconnection from reality. I will believe that it is possible to “fix” war immediately after we “fix” poverty, extreme inequality, hunger, deaths of despair, and crime, any of which should be immensely easier to solve than war. There are multiple genocides happening today .

This speculation in the future if this technology keeps being adopted and the world would have multiple strong players. Would you rather keep the current system? how do you really think the war in Iran or Ukraine would end? It won't end until one side is completely destroyed, that is why it is called wars of attrition. But war of attrition means what when each side is using commercialized cheaply produced intelligent…

What system I would rather have is irrelevant. What system you would rather have is irrelevant. The system that we have, and the systems we will have in the future, are emergent properties of human nature mixed with economic reality (energy/resource availability vs regional economic needs). Voting will not change it, nor will revolution.

You’re welcome to try, but I will no longer waste my time on it. I have studied it for years and I don’t believe it can be changed short of an energy revolution (fusion).

Edit: actually, even if we get fusion, the AI boom has shown that our energy use will automatically expand to consume all economically available energy and resources. So even that would likely not solve the issue.

Re: Ukrainian drone holds position for 6 weeks

#118

Post by larsmaxfield »

tantalor wrote: post #33
SirFatty wrote: post #6

Not a drone...

How is it not a drone?

It is a drone. But "drone" by itself is primarily used to refer to aircraft. I thought the title referred to some sort of ultra-endurance aircraft.

Merriam-Webster defines drone as "uncrewed aircraft or vessel"; Cambridge limits it to "aircraft". When the drone is not an aircraft, it's often preceded with its type: for example, "underwater drone" or "ground drone".

Re: Ukrainian drone holds position for 6 weeks

#119

Post by aogaili »

iamnothere wrote: post #117
aogaili wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This speculation in the future if this technology keeps being adopted and the world would have multiple strong players. Would you rather keep the current system? how do you really think the war in Iran or Ukraine would end? It won't end until one side is completely destroyed, that is why it is called wars of attrition. But war of attrition means what when each side is using commercialized cheaply produced intelligent…

What system I would rather have is irrelevant. What system you would rather have is irrelevant. The system that we have, and the systems we will have in the future, are emergent properties of human nature mixed with economic reality (energy/resource availability vs regional economic needs). Voting will not change it, nor will revolution. You’re welcome to try, but I will no longer waste my time on it. I have studied…

I understand your pessimism, but with all due respect, your argument is weak.

I didn't say our preferences, voting, or opinions will change the system. I believe the system is being reshaped by new technology and a shifting world order—specifically AI, robotics, drone warfare, and a multilateral global structure. We are currently witnessing the first iteration of this kind of conflict: the MVP (Minimum Viable Product).

Think about it: Iran launched 2,400 projectiles at the UAE—a country of only 83,600 sq km—and caused only 10 casualties. Fifty years ago, if you had launched that many, you would have destroyed the entire country. Why the difference? Because it is literally robots fighting robots.

The reality is that these drones, missiles, and anti-missile systems require a global supply chain. To produce them, you need access to intelligence, GPS components, microprocessors, piston engines, aluminium, and more. No single country possesses all of these resources; in a war of attrition, if your supply chain is cut, you have already lost.

In a few years, we will see mass-produced robots and drones that are even more intelligent, all powered by AI. You can study the entirety of human history and you won't find any precedent for what is coming. The best analogy I can think of is a video game.

And frankly, don't we all want less loss of life?

Re: Ukrainian drone holds position for 6 weeks

#120

Post by aogaili »

iamnothere wrote: post #117
aogaili wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This speculation in the future if this technology keeps being adopted and the world would have multiple strong players. Would you rather keep the current system? how do you really think the war in Iran or Ukraine would end? It won't end until one side is completely destroyed, that is why it is called wars of attrition. But war of attrition means what when each side is using commercialized cheaply produced intelligent…

What system I would rather have is irrelevant. What system you would rather have is irrelevant. The system that we have, and the systems we will have in the future, are emergent properties of human nature mixed with economic reality (energy/resource availability vs regional economic needs). Voting will not change it, nor will revolution. You’re welcome to try, but I will no longer waste my time on it. I have studied…

Regarding your commend on energy, I think it is actually an argument on my point that fighting wars is going to be even more absurd. If the world is running short of energy then fighting a war that further consumes energy without clear win will be viewed as absurd. If all wars will become a war of attrition between robots and economies, then fighting wars means no energy left for local economies to run across the globe. The future war will feel like bleeding, a leak in an already scarce system, you don't do water guns fight int the middle of the desert.
Post reply on HN