>Those breakthroughs you mention, you think they wouldn't have been made if it wasn't for the military?
I don't think we'd have GPS (for example) without the military, among other things like nuclear energy/weapons and so on.
Do you seriously think a corporation would have invested the money creating everything needed from the ground up, including ongoing maintenance of a satellite constellation, to let people fix their location on the earth? Where's the profit/ROI in that?
> I don't think we'd have GPS (for example) without the military, among other things like nuclear energy/weapons and so on.
I think you are wrong. Nations that don’t have a military (e.g. Iceland and Costa Rica) still build entire systems of lighthouses, they chart the seas, they map their mountains etc. Countries spend a lot of money into civilian infrastructure. The ROI is in enriching local industry. A GPS system is no bigger ask for civilians then e.g. a railway network. In both cases the ROI is huge for local industry.
As for nuclear energy. A lot of the scientist working on the bomb later became a huge proponents of non-proliferation (J. R. Oppenheimer being a prominent example). I think it is safe to say that the same scientists would have been even happier to work on the technology even if the motive was entirely peaceful.
I don't think we'd have GPS (for example) without the military, among other things like nuclear energy/weapons and so on.
Do you seriously think a corporation would have invested the money creating everything needed from the ground up, including ongoing maintenance of a satellite constellation, to let people fix their location on the earth? Where's the profit/ROI in that?