What I mean is, how come the military of any country weaponize and test new kit or technologies first before civilian use?
An example of this was when the Internet came about and TCP, Apparently these technological inventions were being stewed for use by the U.S. military before they allowed it to be opened to the public.
Yeah I get it, military complex want loads of profit, but you’d think some five or 6 star general would go “Yeah nah we don’t need this shit, waste of tax money just stick with what works”
I might come off as being naive here but I genuinely wonder why all the new bleeding tech time it gets introduced and patented for concept, the army dudes wanna see if it can cause damage to the enemy first in any way.
That title gave me whiplash.
The goal of any military is to build and maintain a technological edge over potential adversaries. Because of that, a lot of basic research happens in and around military organizations.
You mentioned the internet as one such technology and it’s a great example. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) started a project to build a communications network which would be resilient in the event of a nuclear war. Their work created ARPANet. And for a long time, it was really just intended as a US DoD thing and no one really considered its potential uses for the civilian world. It wasn’t until it was opened up to the civilian sector that its potential to change the world was recognized.
Many other technologies follow this trajectory. There is a need in the military and research is done to fulfill that need. If that research is successful, new technology can be created and may eventually move into the civilian market and be very useful. Though, as part of that technology transfer there is always pushback from the military that opening up that technology may reduce or eliminate the technological edge the military holds over potential adversaries.
An example of this would be the Global Positioning System (GPS). GPS was supposed to be a way for the military to be more accurate in the stuff it blew up. When they began opening GPS up for civilian use, there was the worry that adversaries would use GPS against US forces. And so, part of the initial opening up involved intentional inaccuracy in the GPS signal for civilian use. Over time, this has been removed; however, the US DoD does maintain the ability to introduce inaccuracies if considered tactically necessary.
you’d think some five or 6 star general would go “Yeah nah we don’t need this shit, waste of tax money just stick with what works”
So, this actually does happen. In 2013, the US Army famously said tanks, but no more tanks. And Congress overrode that request. At the same time, just “sticking with what works” is a tough thing to know ahead of time. Prior to WWII, air power was considered more of a niche thing. Useful for reconnaissance and not much else. And then the Luftwaffe adopted dive bomb tactics and started wrecking shit from the air. By the end of WWII aircraft had reworked a lot of military doctrine. For example, WWII navies were built around battleships. And then the Japanese rather definitively proved what air craft carriers were capable of (see: Pearl Harbor). Navies are now built around air craft carriers and battleships are largely museum pieces. But, this only happens when militaries are willing and funded to try new things out. Not everything works and that means a lot of money expended on failed projects. But, sometimes it pays off and a military is able to create or extend a technological edge.
So, why does the the bleeding edge tech seem to always come out of the military? It’s because they often have the reasons and resources to do the research. As much as it sucks, the world is still a dangerous place. And so, militaries the world over will always be looking to push the boundaries on technology. And they will also be the first recipients of said technology and will guard it jealously to prevent losing the technological edge it gives them. Yes, the world would be far better off, if humanity was not hanging from a cross of iron. But, thanks to assholes like Putin, here we hang.
I think you got the order wrong.
It’s not the military getting dibs on every new thing. The military is spending huge amounts of money to make the next new thing, often in areas that are not profit focuses of businesses. You could make a good argument the internet wouldn’t exist at all except for the military trying to solve communication problems in a nuclear war context.
DARPA/NASA huge investors in fundamental sciences and technologies that don’t have a immediate payoff.
We are also touching on the evolutionary forces at play in long term sustainable systems. If the military is weak (i.e. behind the tech curve compared to neighbor militaries) that system tends to fall to its neighbors, so the steady state is one where militaries need to be at parity with each other (more or less). Kinda like, why do humans care so much about sex? Because the humans who didn’t care about sex didn’t reproduce, so we are left with the ones who do care making the next generation.
The militarys goal isn’t to make money, its to maintain their tactical edge. And they are up against relentless competition, so they must continuously innovate or lose their advantage.
It’s not so much that the army dudes are buying the tech once its developed, they often ARE developing it. And if its giving them an advantage, they will obviously want to hold that as long as possible.
Really? You’re really asking this question?
I’m gonna play your teacher - what reasons can YOU think of why a military would do this?
This.
Lots of militaries stick with technology from one war to the next. These militaries generally lose when they go against superior tactics.
