I am sure that it is a mix of both Lee, but it is pretty certain that
big expensive projects that have little commercial application will
not be developed by private individuals or enterprise unless there is
private money to throw away. Governments have the money and the
"defence" industry the contacts in government to develop and procure
expensive, non-commercial items like big guns, satellites, radars.
These items can produce by-product technology which is then adopted
by enterprises which see a commercial application (and for many
people, technology is attractive in itself - witness multifunction
displays on wonderbricks).
As for miniaturised electronics, I am sure that commercial and
military development is complementary. My new Ericsson mobile phone
is minute, but miniature flying machines (UAVs) seem to have only a
military impetus at present from what I have read.
Don't forget that governments are manned by politicians who are
biddable by rich defence companies, just like oil barons etc... I
make no distinction between BAe in this country (and GEC before they
porked their business around!) and the various US companies behaving
dishonestly with their respective governments.
Chris
At 04:23 -0500 26/7/02, Lee Penzias wrote:
Actually, it has been private individuals and enterprize.
Governments - and the military - have then bought the stuff from
them after the fact. Although nowadays governments sometimes lay
down contract specs, then invite R&D and bids etc for major
projects, most major advances have been privately researched (or
discovered/invented) and developed -then adopted with modification
for military use. Of course anything of true strategic value is
often declared "secret" until it is "obsolete" - and then allowed to
trickle down to the rtegular commercial markets.
Miniturized electronics is a good example here. It wasn't the
military who "developed" them - it was private inginuity and
expertize. After it became old hat, it was then allowed to be sold
to ordinary folk on commercial lines.
Governments have often generally been some of the last and most
difficult people to convince of the merits of any given "project".
Especially if it has other social and or political implications. Of
course "other" businesses have been known to attempt to stall of
stifle threats to their interests as well ;)
Regards,
Lee
--
<|_:-)_|>
C M I Barker
Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
?
+44 (0)7092 251126
mailto:imagopus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.threeshoes.co.uk
... a nascent photo library.
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|