[thaumasiotes]

> And one of the things to know about war is that the offense always has the advantage because you can always overwhelm the defensive systems.

This is not actually one of the things to know about war. It's about as far from the truth as you can get.

[lucianbr]

It's funny how this guy, as most rich business types, thinks he actually knows everything, and he's an expert in all domains. What the hell does he know about war? He's not a general or admiral or something. Of course he imagines being CEO of a large company is the same thing, but it's really not.

Something to keep in mind when reading his other pronouncements.

[prmoustache]

Even successful businessmen don't even know that much about building and running a business as so few of them are able to replicate a prior success and end up pursuing a career of "passive investors".

[lucianbr]

I hate the term "serial entrepreneur". You don't call someone who makes one breakfast "chef", and if they make several breakfasts "serial chef". If you are qualified for something, you can do it any number of times.

Betrays the reality of them being "serial lottery winners".

[pzo]

Palmer Luckey got quite successful with Anduril even though he wasn't that much a business man in the past, but was successful as engineer [0]

I think war in ukraine shows that hord of very cheap sea drones can even thread a fleet of warships.

[0] https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2024-08-09/weapons-st...

[sulandor]

saturation attacks are mostly cheap and effective. see ddos vs intricate hacking

[mbivert]

Indeed: how to avoid needless conflicts is the key. Having a strong offensive is temporary, and potentially difficult to maintain in the long run.

The use of AI/robots in war is probably not a good way to ingrain into people how to avoid conflicts either: as sad as it sound, let them get a taste of it first hand, and that'll probably calm things down more efficiently: not for a few hours/days, but decades.

[notinmykernel]

>> And one of the things to know about war is that the offense always has the advantage because you can always overwhelm the defensive systems.

> This is not actually one of the things to know about war. It's about as far from the truth as you can get.

... Unless you are writing the rules of war:

"Secretary of Defense Ash Carter appointed Schmidt as chairman of the DoD Innovation Advisory Board announced March 2, 2016. It will be modeled like the Defense Business Board and will facilitate the Pentagon at becoming more innovative and adaptive.

In August 2020, Schmidt launched the podcast Reimagine with Eric Schmidt.[71][72] In December 2021, Schmidt joined Chainlink Labs as a strategic advisor.[73] In October 2022, he co-authored a piece titled "America Could Lose the Tech Contest With China" for Foreign Affairs with Ylli Bajraktari, former executive director of the U.S. National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence.[74] In March 2023, Schmidt testified at a U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Accountability hearing regarding AI.

In 2022, Schmidt was appointed to the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology, a legislative commission charged with making policy recommendations to Congress and the Executive Branch.[1]"

"Since 2023, Schmidt has been involved in building White Stork, a startup developing suicide attack drones.[2]"

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Schmidt

[2] https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahemerson/2024/01/23/eric-sc...

[thaumasiotes]

Your response doesn't actually appear to be related to my comment. Does some part of your comment, or one of your links, support the idea that the attacker in a war always has an advantage over the defender?

Remember when Georgia invaded Russia?

[aguaviva]

Remember when Georgia invaded Russia?

We don't actually. Care to elaborate?

[matthewmacleod]

If only there was some kind of ongoing event that demonstrated exactly this…

[adastra22]

Or, you know, a whole world war that definitively proved the capability of dug-in defenders to hold ground.

[lesuorac]

I think the second world war showed how big the attacker advantage is.

Germany got's industrial base absolutely shattered while the non-defending US was able to use its industrial base to supply arms for 4 fronts (vs Germany, in Africa, for Russia, vs Japan).