[gameprogrammer] Re: Innovation and Creativity. Getting OT?

Latimerius wrote:
>Would you be willing to do without the spectrometer and its benefits if
>it returned life to the tens of millions killed in WWII?
>
>Was the spectrometer all that needed at the time if noone was willing to
>invest into its development?
>
>Humanisms tells us that there's nothing whose value can bear comparison
>with the value of human life.
>  
>

I think that my point didn't come across too well. Inventions WILL 
proceed all the time, WAR OR NO WAR. The mass spectrometer would have 
developed to its current standard more slowly as researchers would have 
had to beg for money from companies. In that way, military spending is 
not a bad thing. I would be happiest if nations slashed their military 
budgets by 3/4 and tansfered all that money to research. Then maybe we 
would get soemwhere and be able to generate jobs, find better societies 
with less crime, etc. At the moment, I know of a lot of researchers who 
"prostitute" their knowledge to get funding from the military. Then 1/2 
of that money goes to the correct project (as agreed to by the Army and 
the Scientist). The other 1/2 goes to fund basic research (the type of 
research with no direct profit) out of which applications will 
eventually come. Show any of these scientist a rich person actually 
willing to spend a lot of money without expecting a profit and they will 
drop their current source of funding.

To look at it another way:
If I go to a local security company (private that is) and say: "I think 
I can find a way to maybe with a lot of work develop a way to make 
better body armour. It will cost 1 million a year to develop and may 
only pay off in about 10 years because no-one knows how it will really 
work, I just have a hunch".

If I go to the army and say: "I think I can find a way to maybe with a 
lot of work develop a way to make better body armour. It will cost 1 
million a year to develop and may only pay off in about 10 years because 
no-one knows how it will really work, I just have a hunch".
Then I go to the security company and say: "For the past 10 years I have 
worked for the army to develop a better body armour. I now know how it 
works and if you fund me for 1 year with 1 million, I can provide you 
with a better design".

Which scenario is more likely? The 2nd one. Why? Because companies can't 
afford pie in the sky ideas. They will fund any idea that will be useful 
as long as they can see profit margins. Otherwise, bye bye idea.

Take for example drug research: Aids research is a big thing. Why? 
because many countries have a problem and they actively sponsor 
researchers. Drug companies see this and know that there is a market.
BUT malaria and tuberculosis are bigger killers worldwide of human 
beings than Aids. Yet they do very little reseach on these. Why? Because 
these diseases affect poorer country who can't afford to pay the high 
prices for the drugs (which will offset the 1 billion dollars, or so, 
development cost). But if a country (eg the US) wants to invade a 
malaria infested region, there will be a market. The army will fund 
research into drugs and the companies will actually manufacture new 
drugs. Then once the war is over, the knowledge will be out there. The 
development cost will have been offset and the drug companies will be 
able to make a profit on the manufacturing of these drugs for poor 
countries.

>  
>
>>Besides: just look at the games out tere. How many people like to play 
>>First person shooters? Why is it so importnat to them? Why do so many 
>>programmers try to get cutting edge graphics and very high frame rates? 
>>Why are PCs getting faster if all we did was to type reports on the PCs?
>>    
>>
>
>And finally, what does this have to do with military research? ;-)
>
>       latimerius
>  
>
Nothing whatsoever, it just seems that human nature is geared towards 
war. I think that FPS games are not ideal for young people as they don't 
learn that pulling a trigger has consequences. They think war is great 
until they are given a gun and told to actually shoot someone they care 
about.

Before a flame war starts, I know that not everyone will go out and 
shoot someone, but it only takes 0.00001% of the people to go out there 
and do something bad for everyone to suffer. One of my friends got 
stopped the other night by the police and was asked for some money. The 
alternative was a trumped up charge. He paid. Didn't do anyhting. Why? 
"Because they know where you live". This is 1 cop out of about 30,000 in 
the region. This is 1 kid out of 1,200,000. But 5 days later, the story 
seems to have become a rumor. Everyone seems to be this kid's friend. 
Every cop is the "bad" cop. Everyone is scarred of them and of going out 
at night. (everyone means everyone I know).

That has nothing to do with military research, unless you believe that 
the army knows how to wage a psychological warfare. Perhaps 4,000 years 
ago, someone carried out some military research and told 1 person: tell 
anyone that we killed the king and your whole family disappears. Now, 
everyone knows about this trick and many people use it....

ANyone who wishes to go on:
Will you please email me privately as it seems this topic may get a bit 
tedious for others on the list.

-- 

This message is intended for the addressee only and is confidential and
the copying thereof is prohibited. The above information may
contain personal views of the author thereof and is not necessarily the
views or policies of the University of Pretoria and the University of
Pretoria does therefore not accept liability for any damages arising
from the correctness of the facts stated in this communication, unless
specifically stated. If you have received this message in error, please
notify us immediately and destroy the original message.



-- Binary/unsupported file stripped by Ecartis --
-- Type: text/x-vcard
-- File: awhaley.vcf

Other related posts: