http://www.macsmind.com/wordpress/20...disarm-america

So.... what are your thoughts? or has this been hashed out already?

If you read down in the comments posted , there is a lengthy post by Curmudgeon that I think says it all.

Interesting.

The "swords into plowshares" rhetoric is common every election. Then the candidate finds out that s/he can't deliver.

The irony is that most defense spending generates even more non-defense utilization of the technologies, and the circle-of-money is what keeps this economy afloat. It's proven to be better economic seed money than all the $300/$600 checks the Treasury can mail.

There are very few technologies in use today (including the Internet - sorry, Mr. Gore) that can't trace their roots back to a Department of Defense initiative. Even the use of nuclear energy to provide electricity began with defense applications to harness the giant at an affordable and controllable manner.

Both candidates will be making statements geared towards particular special interest groups, and the words will be what each group du jour wants to hear, even if the slightest amount of common sense knocks the socks off the message. This is just one of the examples.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

Interesting.

The "swords into plowshares" rhetoric is common every election. Then the candidate finds out that s/he can't deliver.

The irony is that most defense spending generates even more non-defense utilization of the technologies, and the circle-of-money is what keeps this economy afloat. It's proven to be better economic seed money than all the $300/$600 checks the Treasury can mail.

There are very few technologies in use today (including the Internet - sorry, Mr. Gore) that can't trace their roots back to a Department of Defense initiative. Even the use of nuclear energy to provide electricity began with defense applications to harness the giant at an affordable and controllable manner.

Both candidates will be making statements geared towards particular special interest groups, and the words will be what each group du jour wants to hear, even if the slightest amount of common sense knocks the socks off the message. This is just one of the examples.

I do not know how accurate this Wikipedia article is but it looks like the Internet came out of the space race between the US and the USSR. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet

Originally Posted by Taltarzac

I do not know how accurate this Wikipedia article is but it looks like the Internet came out of the space race between the US and the USSR. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet

The beginning of the cited Wiki article discussed the Advanced Research Projects Agency and the role of ARPANET. Please see below.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense...rojects_Agency

You can find out about the history of the Internet through the MIT Press website at:

http://mitpress.mit.edu/catalog/item...ype=2&tid=4633

I remember the confusion in '83 when they split the military nodes off the ARPANET to form the MILNET. We were just getting into it pretty strongly and many were very, very sold on it. Others not so much. We were still in the experimental stage of computers talking to computers and even basics like real electronic mail left most people in the dark. I didn't fully understand the concept of bridges and was convinced that this action of dividing the existing military/educational system would severely limit the grownth potential of the NET.

I've been wrong about a lot of other stuff too.

Originally Posted by SteveZ

Interesting.

The "swords into plowshares" rhetoric is common every election. Then the candidate finds out that s/he can't deliver.

The irony is that most defense spending generates even more non-defense utilization of the technologies, and the circle-of-money is what keeps this economy afloat. It's proven to be better economic seed money than all the $300/$600 checks the Treasury can mail.

There are very few technologies in use today (including the Internet - sorry, Mr. Gore) that can't trace their roots back to a Department of Defense initiative. Even the use of nuclear energy to provide electricity began with defense applications to harness the giant at an affordable and controllable manner.

Both candidates will be making statements geared towards particular special interest groups, and the words will be what each group du jour wants to hear, even if the slightest amount of common sense knocks the socks off the message. This is just one of the examples.

If what you are saying is true (and I believe it is) and the unintended consequences help us, just imagine where we would be if our intention was to create technology that would benefit us. It would be a totally different world....

Originally Posted by jeckyl

If what you are saying is true (and I believe it is) and the unintended consequences help us, just imagine where we would be if our intention was to create technology that would benefit us. It would be a totally different world....

Agree.