Does the Military Dominate CS Research?

An anonymous reader asks: "It seems at my university the military has their fingers in much of the computer science research happening on campus: sensors, intelligent agents, autonomous vehicles, supercomputing. Is this the case at other schools around the US? How about outside of the US? How is the military shaping the current state of CS research? What areas of research atrophy because the funding goes to investigating military applications of new technology?"

Comments

When has it not shaped the foundation of CS?

[jhubbard]

Let's be realistic here. When has it not?

Computers were originally people who determined calculated firing tables. The first computers were used to calculate this information and break encryption codes.

The Internet is based on equipment and protocols that DARPA paid for. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Check out the current and recent solicitations.

I'll grant you that business plays a large role too. It funds its fair share, but it seems as though it is more practical and immediate. The military seems to fund things that might not be very practical now, but can possible provide the edge in battle.

Re:Yup

[T-Ranger]

For number crunching apps, sure. You diddnt mention the use of computers as far back as WWII for number crunching for nuclear research. In WWII it was to figure out how much stuff they needed, now entire nuclear explosions can be simulated. Or so they claim.

But there is a sepearate, distinct, and very important component of computers that isnt realy computation: data processing.

This is where, historicly (<1975 say) where IBM (and its predecessors) worked almost exclusivly. Censuses started it all, the 1890 US Census being the first done on punch card machines (reducing a 10 year job into months). IIRC, czatist Russia leased Hollerith machines in the 19th century. (since censuses doers were the primary market for infintile IBM, and no one continiously took censuses, IBM generaly leased machines (and opearators, assumably) rather then selling them. Of course, they continue this practice, esp. on the "big iron", even today).

Most people agree that censuses, at least, are benign. It hasent been until the last 5 years that data processing has become sufficently advanced for average people to consiter it at all threatining. Im making a distinction beteween data collection/processing itself from the application therof. Privacy concerns (for example) are now very much a concern of "normal people", even if they otherwise trust the data collectors and what happens to the data. Up untill 5 years ago no one had enough data for the data alone to be risky/dangerous/intrusive. Now, not so much. Anyway...

On the other hand, "data processing", even before "computation", has been used for what would be universally accepted as evil purposes. Or at least one: I speak of Nazi Germany using Hollerith machines to keep tabs on the Jews. To quantify the "Jew problem" (as they saw it). And to effectivly round them up. The rest being "common" history (which I will ignore, this being a discussion of computers). The use of Hollerith machines being largely unknown, even amongst computer/IT types. Even though I dont agree with the authors basic premis (that IBM is at least morally liable for some of the Holocaust), I will point out IBM and the Holocaust : The Strategic Alliance Between Nazi Germany and America's Most PowerfulCorporation.

Of course the topic of discussion here is military usage of computers. Censuses certenly dont count. I dont think the Nazis use of computers does either. There is a distinction beteween the German Military/Navy, and the German (Nazi) Government, and "special" (ie, SS) forces.