| ▲ | SturgeonsLaw 10 hours ago |
| >why would a government actually do anything for a population that is net value extracting? Because we outnumber them a million to one, and history is littered with examples of what happens to leaders who squeeze their population a little too far |
|
| ▲ | bigstrat2003 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| I'm not really convinced it's actually possible to overthrow a modern government. The disparity in killing power available to the two sides is just too great. Like yeah we outnumber the government a million to one (figuratively), but that's not going to help much when they have tanks, artillery, and planes to defend themselves with. |
| |
| ▲ | Aloha 9 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The people that run that killing power are also citizens, and they either must be bought at an increasing steep price, or they will go with the bulk of the nation (mostly with their near and distant relatives who are suffering) - network effects are very real here. | | |
| ▲ | throw-the-towel 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | If this argument were true, dictatorships couldn't exist. However, they do. | | |
| ▲ | Warwolt an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | > they either must be bought at an increasing steep price | |
| ▲ | makeitdouble 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You're assuming that citizen are united in what they want. That's usually not the case. |
| |
| ▲ | 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | beeflet 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | What happens when the killing power is a autonomous machine? Like now? | | |
| ▲ | throw310822 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's a very valid concern, but technological advances are also available to the people. Asymmetrics war (terrorism, depending the side you're on) is always a possibility, unless the gap between the possibility of states and those of citizens grows too wide. |
|
| |
| ▲ | acessoproibido 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Didnt the nation armed with all of this modern tech lose to a guerilla force of ricefarmers armed with sharpened sticks and AKs?
Or do you think the Vietnam war would go very different now? | | |
| ▲ | anon-3988 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | The US could have easily, easily won the Vietnam war if they just dropped 1 or 2 nukes. The modern military is going to have drone that swarm the sky 24/7. They can develop virus that only they have the cure to. They can drop EMPs. They can grow their own food in their own lab while we all slowly die and wither outside. These are powers that are actually, technically, plausibly be granted to a single or several individual in the future. The future where human is obsolete is scary. Just reread that sentence again. Humans are obsolete. | | |
| ▲ | SV_BubbleTime an hour ago | parent [-] | | Since no one has bothered to explain how wrong you are… I’ll give you the easy version… Tanks and drones, don’t stand on street corners and enforce non-assembly and curfews. The tanks and drones argument and later Biden’s “we have F15s” claim are wildly devoid of reality. You do not understand what a “modern military” is. Each MRAP takes multiple people to keep it running, and it’s just a diesel truck. You think tanks and drones don’t take teams of people to keep running? |
|
| |
| ▲ | beeflet 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The highly specialized vehicles of war are not that threatening in a civil conflict. Think about how much tax money it takes to purchase a tank for example. There is maybe 1 tank for every 1000 people, let's say. Yet it only takes a single rocket launcher to destroy a tank. Look at what happened to the USA in Afganistan recently. What really threatens the chances of popular revolution are the systems of surveillance and inter-dependence that we are building up, and the existence of killer drones that can compete with armed peasants at scale. | |
| ▲ | SV_BubbleTime an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | No offense, but ask someone in the military how wrong you are. Tanks and drones don’t stand on street corners and enforce curfews. Our “modern military” in handicapped in multiple ways, primarily that society does not have the stomach to win wars anymore. And, beyond that, it takes TEAMS of people to keep the simplest vehicle or weapon system running. It’s all logistics and fuel. In a civil conflict it was dissolve quickly without a unified force and a ton of fuel. |
|
|
| ▲ | myk9001 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| So, you literally read "unlimited supply of military via robots" in the parent comment, and still reply with this? Humanity truly doesn't stand a chance... |
|
| ▲ | mrob 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Historical leaders didn't have fully automated killer drone factories. (Just an example; a real AGI will probably come up with more effective ideas.) |
|
| ▲ | analog8374 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| So it's a mind control problem. We have a good technology for that |
|
| ▲ | beeflet 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| "killbots, mow down these stupid protesters" |
