War shite (moved from Blank Canvas)

Printable View

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page

07-10-2019, 15:57
struth

War shite (moved from Blank Canvas)

Discussion moved from here: https://theartofsound.net/forum/show...30#post1129030

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJSki2fly

Virtually any tool including a SMARTphone can be used for good or bad, a good use example is when it is connected to a SMARTwatch that monitors heart rate, and can take an ECG and if anything bad is detected notifies the person or a doctor, the Apple products and a specific app are capable of doing so and is in use in the USA and I believe is under trial in the UK. There are many other examples of good use, a bad use, IMO, is when apps and operating systems have code imbedded in them which learn/monitor what you do on the internet/device and then bombard you with adverts and email from commercial organisations to show you stuff to entice you to buy. We are all familiar with pop-ups on computers, it has now moved on where what you see on web pages, and social media pages is based on what you look at on phones and computers. Another aspect of this is if you search for a particular product, say and air flight to find the best price and you repeat this over several days you will discover that the price with different parties will actually increase, why is this you may ask, it is because the more interest that an individual shows in an item then the more the seller will try and charge for it, true commercialism, so another bad use, market manipulation.

A bad tool I can think of is an Atom or Hydrogen Bomb, not much use really apart from killing several million people in one hit and leaving the area it hits radioactive for many years, but I am sure there are some out there that will argue it has its good uses.

yeah it kills several million people in one hit and leaves the area it hits radioactive for many years:eyebrows: depending on your viewpoint and what is happening it could just about be the best of a bad job I guess... Trouble with inventions is you cant really uninvent them.
07-10-2019, 17:05
struth

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macca

I don't think the idea that wealthy people have influence over politics is a surprise to anyone. Nor is it a new thing.

It's one thing to say that the internet enables people to advertise their tat more selectively. (although see my previous post where I linked to an article about the relative ineffectiveness of internet advertising compared to advertising in the press or television).

It's more of a leap to suggest that it could be used to control behaviour in a wider sense. On balance I'm more inclined to agree with Joe that it's more of a threat to governments - by enabling large numbers of people to instantly communicate and organise, and by providing alternative viewpoints to the 'party line'. Isn't this why the internet is heavily controlled and censored in authoritarian regimes like China?

Sure, it can work that way too, and China does control its web as does N Korea, But it doesnt take much stretch of imagination to see modern tech improvements being used against us, the people as well. Not saying it currently is, at least on any large and deep scale but i bet its on the agenda of the secret service and govts.
Trouble is, if its done right it may be difficult to know.
07-10-2019, 17:42
AJSki2fly

Quote:

Originally Posted by Macca

Can you provide a hypothetical scenario of how that might work?

Don’t need to, I believe it is used in China for propaganda and people management.[emoji33]
07-10-2019, 17:55
Macca

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJSki2fly

Don’t need to, I believe it is used in China for propaganda and people management.[emoji33]

Can you be more specific about the 'people management' thing. What are the nuts and bolts of it and what are they managing the people to do?
07-10-2019, 23:27
Mikeandvan

Quote:

Originally Posted by AJSki2fly

A bad tool I can think of is an Atom or Hydrogen Bomb, not much use really apart from killing several million people in one hit and leaving the area it hits radioactive for many years, but I am sure there are some out there that will argue it has its good uses.

There are so many people out there who believe that the American dropping of the Atom bomb on Japan was justified, really, so many. Even after hearing the historical statements of the president and Generals of the time that 'Japan would have surrendered anyway' they stick to their belief that the murder of over a million civilians in 2 nuclear strikes and one massive regular bombing campaign involving napalm amongst other bombs on Tokyo (actually killed more than each of the atom bombs).
08-10-2019, 08:11
Joe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikeandvan

There are so many people out there who believe that the American dropping of the Atom bomb on Japan was justified, really, so many. Even after hearing the historical statements of the president and Generals of the time that 'Japan would have surrendered anyway'

That was what was said after the event. If Japan was ready to surrender 'anyway', why had they not already done so? The allies called on Japan to surrender unconditionally, or face destruction, as part of the Potsdam Declaration in July 1945, but the Japanese government vowed that they would fight on.
08-10-2019, 10:19
Mikeandvan

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe

That was what was said after the event. If Japan was ready to surrender 'anyway', why had they not already done so? The allies called on Japan to surrender unconditionally, or face destruction, as part of the Potsdam Declaration in July 1945, but the Japanese government vowed that they would fight on.

That proves my point exactly, imo its never ok to kill civilians, especially on such an industrial level, that is close what the Nazis were doing.
08-10-2019, 10:53
struth

tbf, we didnt start it, and in such a conflict, no-one is really a civilian alas. It really was us or them; it had to be us. Theygot warned, then even after the first one they refused to give in, so a second(and last as we had no more)was used.
It is true that their use was also useful in seeing how they really worked in practice and also to hopefully gain an advantage over the Russians in discussions, BUT, that wasnt really the main military aim... it was to save a huge amount of lives, many of them ours
08-10-2019, 11:15
Macca

Quote:

Originally Posted by struth

tbf, we didnt start it, and in such a conflict, no-one is really a civilian alas. It really was us or them; it had to be us. Theygot warned, then even after the first one they refused to give in, so a second(and last as we had no more)was used.
It is true that their use was also useful in seeing how they really worked in practice and also to hopefully gain an advantage over the Russians in discussions, BUT, that wasnt really the main military aim... it was to save a huge amount of lives, many of them ours

that's correct. read about the battle for Okinawa and how many casualties the Yanks took there. Based on that they estimated they would take 1 million casualties in the first 12 months of an invasion of mainland Japan.

Aside from that if the invasion had gone ahead and there was conventional fighting for the Jap home islands how many civilians would have died during that? Almost certainly more than in the two nuclear strikes. The Japanese government expected all women and children to fight - and they were up for it as well. The reality is there was no acceptable option except to use the nukes.
08-10-2019, 11:34
Joe

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikeandvan

That proves my point exactly

It doesn't 'prove your point' which was that the Japanese 'would have surrendered anyway', which is precisely what they didn't do.

Show 50 post(s) from this thread on one page