When thinking about military innovation today, we often look to the 20th century for historical guidance, especially inventions during World War I and subsequent developments in aircraft carriers, tanks, submarines, and strategic bombers. But are these the right analogies?

. @akcronin has made an important argument that we should be looking at the 19th century, and how the digital age is one of "open innovation" driven by commercial processes, not the military https://press.armywarcollege.edu/parameters/vol50/iss3/8/">https://press.armywarcollege.edu/parameter...

You can also find @akcronin talking about the fascinating history of dynamite, with a sprinkle of anarchists and drones, on the American Innovations podcast from @WonderyMedia @stevenbjohnson https://art19.com/shows/american-innovations-podcast/episodes/f4cb9b17-a138-497f-aaa6-813c49f635ec">https://art19.com/shows/ame...

Similarly, @mchorowitz has argued that we should approach artificial intelligence as an "enabling" technology, much like the combustion engine and electricity, and less like a weapons technology https://tnsr.org/2018/05/artificial-intelligence-international-competition-and-the-balance-of-power/">https://tnsr.org/2018/05/a...

You& #39;ve now reached the end of this thread and are expecting a punchy concluding thought. Sorry to disappoint. The question at the beginning of the thread isn& #39;t rhetorical, so I have nothing for you.