UPDATES

After I wrote my 5/10 robot conspiracy theory posting, I thought some more about the potential impacts of transforming our military into a predominantly robotic force.

One thought is this: robots don't find themselves in moral quandaries. It is far easier to send robotic forces against targets that human soldiers might balk at attacking. A soldier on the ground will likely question an order to shoot a child; a robot would simply follow its program. Even the use of a remote controlled drone makes a morally suspect action easier, as the human controller sitting in a far away command bunker sees only through the limited sensors of the drone, not with his or her own eyes. So much easier to push a button that launches a missile from a thousand miles away than to aim and pull the trigger with the target just across the street.

The April 2006 edition of Harper's included a panel discussion on the possibility of an American coup d'etat by the military. One of the arguments made against such an action ever taking place is that Americans aren't going to take up arms against their neighbors. Reading some of the statements in this article (excerpts here), as well as about the complaints of religious bias at the Air Force Academy, I found myself wondering if that is really the case, given that our all volunteer military is now hardly representative of the population.

But a robotic force has no allegiance to anyone, or any principles, other than its programming. How much easier to send a bunch of automated tanks and drones against a rioting crowd, a noisy minority, or a political opponent! What dangers to the republic will we experience 20 years down the road if DARPA's strategic plans are realized?

(For some related thoughts, see Michael Ventura's April 28th column "Wild Cards.")

THE SIERRA CLUB recently posted an article on the cost of transporting food, and they've also got a site focused on the True Cost of Food. For a more detailed look at the costs of transporting food, one of the themes in Michael Pollan's The Omnivore's Dilemma, see "Why Our Food is So Dependent on Oil." One interesting statistic: it takes 127 calories of fossil fuel energy to transport one calorie of food energy (iceberg lettuce is their example) from the U.S. to England. Hmm...

AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH, the new documentary on global warming featuring Al Gore, opens May 24. Let's all go see it (and don't forget your sunscreen).