Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com.
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world or !askusa@discuss.online
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
Yeah… in optimising weapons and stuff that carries weapons. Imagine what could have been, if the same amount of money/time/whatever would have been invested in medicine or renewable energy.
A lot of scientific breakthroughs are made like this. Internet was made by the military. Rockets were made because we were trying to outarm each other.
While it would be best if we didn’t kill each other, the optimised outcome is getting scientific progress while killing each other. The silver lining of concentration camps is the human experimentation which gave solid evidence for solid science.
There is no such thing as a silver lining to that. What Mengele and his goons did had no scientific backing, produced nothing but tortured and maimed kids, while killing thousands more to prove some crude ideas
The Soviets also made scientific breakthroughs within their military industrial complex. Not much of that trickled down to ordinary people, which then hindered it from being further applied.
How much of "solid science" are we talking about? My understanding is that it was not a lot, and its quality was rather poor.