The Army Is 3D Printing Warheads 140
Jason Koebler writes: In its latest bid to kill more people, more efficiently, and at less cost, the army is planning to print warhead components, according to the latest issue of Army Technology (PDF). "3D printing of warheads will allow us to have better design control and utilize geometries and patterns that previously could not be produced or manufactured," James Zunino, a researcher at the Armament Research, Engineering and Design Center said. "Warheads could be designed to meet specific mission requirements whether it is to improve safety to meet an Insensitive Munitions requirement, or it could have tailorable effects, better control, and be scalable to achieve desired lethality."
Re:GPLv4 - the good public license? (Score:5, Insightful)
This comes from someone who just does not understand that without weapons manufacture most of the world would be speaking German or Russian by now.
Re:GPLv4 - the good public license? (Score:5, Insightful)
I just don't want to have helped them!
But you have no problem basking in the freedom provided by those who use them.
Quality over quantity (Score:3, Insightful)
For a long time it hasn't been about how to "kill more people" but rather how to kill "the right people" more efficiently.
We put a huge amount of effort and money into weapon systems that will minimize collateral damage.
As much as it is popular to vilify the US- none of our opponents seem to care as much who they blow up.
Re:GPLv4 - the good public license? (Score:4, Insightful)
Most wars are started when one group of greedy bastards wants to take over from another group of greedy bastards. These greedy bastards (generally politicians and their corporate sponsors) are the "elite" of societies. Since they control the wealth, they have the most to gain (or lose) by war. Everyone else is just cannon fodder and will end up worse off after the war regardless of who wins. There are a few interesting probes of this rule. I just finished reading George Orwell's "Homage to Catalonia" which is an account of his experiences in the Spanish Civil War. Apparently, the faction Orwell was fighting for (apparently by chance), POUM, did try to establish an egalitarian workers society. However, they were sold out by the Russian Communists and other factions.
I think it's really difficult (?impossible) to establish a truly egalitarian society anywhere which would actually improve the condition of the peons. The usual result in just about every political system is that you end up with a few greedy bastards in charge fighting the greedy bastards next door.
I'm not sure it would make much difference to be speaking German or Russian or Japanese or Chinese or have to profess belief in a different god. If you survived the war, you will still have the same shitty job living hand to mouth... just a different master.
Re:GPLv4 - the good public license? (Score:3, Insightful)
One could limit the scope of 'evil' to whatever I decide is evil today.
FTFY.
Free software means free. Exactly how many riders and amendments to FOSS licenses do we want to have? "Cannot be used by anyone in Canada." "Cannot be used to make ugly things." "Cannot be used on the Sabbath."
"We make software because of that warm fuzzy feeling.
"We" make software for any number of reasons, and "we" give up the right to tell people how they have to use it when we make it free. And, if I recall correctly, "we" explicitly tell people that what they make with our software is not covered by the license. I.e., code you compile with gcc doesn't have to be licensed under GPL.
Re:GPLv4 - the good public license? (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly. I had to laugh when reading that article:
But the military isn’t just interested in saving lives—more often than not, it takes them.
Really? No shit. The military kills people?
In its latest bid to kill more people, more efficiently, and at less cost
Isn't this what we want all government agencies to strive for? When the military's actual job is to figure out how to kill people and destroy things with maximum effectiveness and efficiency, then we really shouldn't complain when they seem to be doing a good job of it. I'm not exactly sure what this writer thought the military's purpose is, but he seems horrified at the thought of using technology to kill people more efficiently.
So, there we have it. While comparatively small-scale dangers like homebrew plastic guns make headlines, one of the most powerful and deadly organizations in the world is using the same technology to build better weapons of mass destruction on the cheap.
Should the US not develop technologies like this and simply hope no one else does either? People today are so damned sure that we'll never get into another large-scale shooting war. I hope to hell we don't, but if we do, I'd like our side to have the best weapons, and all the better if they're efficient to produce. Even if, in the future, the military is scaled down to paramilitary forces level (small, lean and efficient), wouldn't it be better to outfit them inexpensively rather than spending billions on weapons production? Who the hell would advocate spending more of our budget on rockets and bombs when less expensive devices could be made much cheaper (other than weapons manufacturers, I suppose)? Wouldn't that leave more money to spend on better things?
The author got one thing right. For all it gets wrong (and I'm sure actual military folks could provide plenty of stories), the US military arguably is the most lethal and destructive force the world has ever known. They also don't go off killing random people and blowing things up. Elected civilians are the ones who ultimately decide whether or not to pull the trigger. It's easy enough to demonize the military while conveniently forgetting that they guy you voted for is the one sending them out to kill people, but it's dishonest as hell.
Re:GPLv4 - the good public license? (Score:2, Insightful)
If you survived the war, you will still have the same shitty job living hand to mouth... just a different master.
It depends on the "master"; that can make a huge difference. At the end of WW2, Western Europe got the U.S. as it's "master", who paid upwards of $13 billion (a staggering amount of foreign aid at the time) to rebuild, self-rule, and prosperity. Eastern Europe got shit on by the Soviet Union for about the next 50 years.