IMAGE: US Army (CC0)
The U.S. Congress has rejected a request for an Army contract to procure 6,900 modified and adapted units of Microsoft’s HoloLens, following a 2018 $480 million contract that saw the Army get an initial 5,000 units of the device and a further 120,000 over the course of the coming decade.
Feedback from internal evaluations by 1,000 soldiers during more than 100,000 hours of training highlighted complaints of headaches, nausea and eye fatigue that could affect their ability to complete a mission. In addition, there appeared to be problems related to the light emitted by the front display of the visors, which could result in enemy troops being able to locate soldiers wearing them.
In 2018, when the first contract was announced, the Army claimed that the visors could contribute to “increased lethality, mobility and situational awareness needed to achieve overmatch against current and future adversaries,” a group of 50 Microsoft employees went so far as to write a letter of protest to its CEO, Satya Nadella, and its president, Brad Smith saying they “refused to develop technologies for war and oppression,” and demanding that the company’s management rescind the contract, which obviously did not happen.
Now, the Army has cut back on its intentions to continue equipping its soldiers with augmented reality devices of this type, but it is still clearly committed to the technology: although the next $400 million contract for the acquisition of the devices has been blocked by Congress, another $40 million contract has been authorized to try to correct the problems encountered in the use of the device, along with another $125 million for Microsoft to work on the development of an improved model. According to the military, despite the current limitations and problems with the use of the device, the concept of an Integrated Visual Augmentation System, or IVAS, continues to generate a great deal of interest.
The use of technology by the armed forces historically driven development, and many of the devices and developments we commonly use today once benefited from potential military use or interest. If Microsoft HoloLens can adapt to situations such as those that take place in an environment as complex and with as many limitations as a battlefield, it is possible that it could contribute to improvements in the product and its eventual commercialization, but… is that a path that, in the 21st century, we want to continue advancing down? Developing technologies to be able to kill other human beings better and more efficiently? Is the human species capable of learning something throughout its history?
(En español, aquí)