The house I grew up in, in the UK, was never re-sided, re-roofed or required its exterior re-painted in at least 200 years and parts of it 600 years
These cheap houses built in the US create a lot of maintenance and waste. Siding/roofing seems to need to be replaced every 15 years or so
Some friends are just going through the process of re-roofing. I asked them about going with a metal roof, or some other kind that might last longer. Their attitude was they don't plan on being in the house that long. In 15 years it'll be the next owners problem
Curious what that means for society if the trend continues. The single people I know are only interested in finding someone in the same education bracket.
Does this lead to many more unmarried people like Japan?
In summary drones make it to easy for the countries like the UK and the US to kill with no risk to their own service men. The missiles are not magic, there will be collateral damage. Solders on the ground could mitigate this
> Robot warfare is a logical endpoint of such development
Robot vs. Robot is unlikely to settle wars - we may as well play chess rather than wage war and humans have too much bloodlust to solve differences that way. What is likely to happen is having country A's robots in country B's homeland killing humans, while battling country B's robots in A's homeland. What constitutes a "war front" will be really confusing when the next war between great powers comes.
The goal of a war usually isn't to rack the highest bodycount, but to break the opponent's will. IDK how this works with fully robotic armies, but some devastation of the homelands is probably expected. The concept of a war front has been already muddled since the advent of airplanes.
> The concept of a war front has been already muddled since the advent of airplanes.
True, but airplanes have to fly back. I'd say cruise missiles, then UAVs/drones and loitering munitions have continued to blur the lines. Having loitering bots of war on the ground will be a further escalation.
> The missiles are not magic, there will be collateral damage. Solders on the ground could mitigate this
I have no data about this but my gut tells me a drone could operate more safely than a ground team. The drone pilot is under much less stress while foot soldiers have to make live and death decisions in split seconds.
Also drone strikes are easier to audit than opaque small team operations in enemy territory.
But we should have 'skin in the game'. Removing the risk, by using robots, lowers the barriers to engage in conflicts and may lead us to behave more aggressively than we would have done otherwise.
Chrysler (30 out of 30) by Stellantis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellantis) along with: Fiat, Alfa Romeo (unranked), Dodge (21) RAM (15) Jeep (26)