FWIW if someone were to build AI technology to classify militants vs civilians in images from drones then I'd prefer it to be a competent company such as Google, since presumably an accurate well-engineered classifier would reduce collateral damage.
Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
211–220 of 516 posts
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#212Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not that black and white. Working on missile guidance? Then I can see your point of view... but everything else in some way facilitates or contributes to facilitating such things. One can rapidly reduce it to "fixing a Linux bug... facilitates the military industrial complex". You might wish to not work on things that directly are used by the military, but the vast majority of technology is indirectly used becau…
I am not trying to over-simplify, but should I stop buying goods and services because the taxes taken on these transactions benefit the military? The dividing line varies from person to person, of course. I think most would agree that improving a guidance algorithm for missile targeting is directly supporting the military. Fixing a kernel bug is not directly supporting the military. I'm a pacifist and I would go by m…
A group of Quakers drafted a law in the 60s that would have allowed them to pay their taxes to UNICEF instead of the US treasury for that reason.
The concept is called “Conscientious objection to military taxation”
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#213Every company I apply to is told during the interview process that I will not work on military projects, and that I would probably leave the company if they chose to take on a military contract. If you have personal moral limits and you’re upfront about them then no-one is the worse off; I’ve yet to be turned down for a job over it and, somewhat the opposite, companies seem to appreciate frankness.
It's not that black and white. Working on missile guidance? Then I can see your point of view... but everything else in some way facilitates or contributes to facilitating such things. One can rapidly reduce it to "fixing a Linux bug... facilitates the military industrial complex". You might wish to not work on things that directly are used by the military, but the vast majority of technology is indirectly used becau…
This is me speaking for them but it seems to me that they mean to say that the point where they draw the line is where you take a contract/business from the military. In other words, if they are paying you that is over the line. Working on missile guidance for NASA? That's okay. Working on a text processor for the military? That's not okay.
This seems like a reasonable way to draw a line. Obviously things get questionable as they might work for a company that has a contract with a company that has a military contract. How can they be sure that their work won't be used as a part of that contract?
But as a start I think this framework isn't so bad. Probably better than something I would be able to come up with on the spot
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#214Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
[flagged]
> No, I'm saying you are denying people who want to change the current status quo the right to do so by calling them freeloaders
Changing the status quo is a political action. The military largely isn't political, they are a tool of the politicians, a loaded gun that the politicians point and sometimes shoot. The focus on the military is simply incorrect.
> Communist government wasn't all bad, there's a reason why plenty of people yearn for return of the "good old days" - it has succeeded in many of the "for the people" goals, but failed spectacularly at others
Very debatable, but your argument is simply invalid. Many also yearn for "the good old days of racial segregation", but that doesn't somehow imply racial segregation succeeded at some things that we ought to admire.
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#215Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you contribute to open source software then you’re contributing to military projects.
Also, to world peace. And crime. And law enforcement. And... humanity.
Yes, until people understand the nature of duality, they struggle with simple concepts. If I choose to not protect myself , am I enabling murders and evil to flourish? Life and death, peace and war, these things are necessary for the engine of reality to continue to cycle. Living itself is a fight against death- would you deny death it due?
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#216Every company I apply to is told during the interview process that I will not work on military projects, and that I would probably leave the company if they chose to take on a military contract. If you have personal moral limits and you’re upfront about them then no-one is the worse off; I’ve yet to be turned down for a job over it and, somewhat the opposite, companies seem to appreciate frankness.
I've seen that kind of thinking in the past and it's pretty popular view. I'm just not so sure about this moral aspect.
Why do you think it's more moral/ethical to abstain of supporting military? Maybe you won't do this but be sure that in some other country some similarly talented people will.
If you (and many others) abstain from it on similar basis you and closest people you know may be in danger of being affected by more advanced military equipment other (possibly hostile) armies can get.
Maybe it's just not in people heads that world and homeland safety is not given for free and granted forever.
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#217Software engineers in the valley seem disconnected from reality. Maybe they believe politically correct fairies drop from the heavens and secure the US, it's borders and interests. Or maybe the Taliban and ISIS don't deserve drone attacks. Whatever their delusion, it's for the good. Military and defense funding yielded everything from the transistor to the internet. Let the next wave of innovation happen outside the…
Hey what's your name? I keep a blacklist of patriotic amurrikkkans like yourself so I can make sure that if your resume comes across my desk, I'll get to mock you on Instagram before round-filing your application.
No matter what you're responding to, you need to make your comments more civil and substantive than this.
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#218These employees are free to exercise their right to (not) work for whomever they want, but the certainty they express (as well as most commenters here) in their own self-righteousness seems misplaced to me. There's certainly a case to be made that a strong US military is in the world's best interest. In fact, I would wager that a majority of Americans (and a majority of citizens of democratic countries across the wor…
> There's certainly a case to be made that a strong US military is in the world's best interest. In fact, I would wager that a majority of Americans (and a majority of citizens of democratic countries across the world) hold the belief expressed in the previous statement. That's probably true for US citizens, but I highly doubt non-US folks share that view (at least from a western European perspective I'd say definite…
Did you kind of forget that Russia pretty much controlled half of Europe not too long ago, and sent tanks to fight citizens when it was needed to maintain "order".
Countries under US rule never faced such severe repression.
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#219These employees are free to exercise their right to (not) work for whomever they want, but the certainty they express (as well as most commenters here) in their own self-righteousness seems misplaced to me. There's certainly a case to be made that a strong US military is in the world's best interest. In fact, I would wager that a majority of Americans (and a majority of citizens of democratic countries across the wor…
Thank you. Many want their cake and to eat it too.
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#220Every company I apply to is told during the interview process that I will not work on military projects, and that I would probably leave the company if they chose to take on a military contract. If you have personal moral limits and you’re upfront about them then no-one is the worse off; I’ve yet to be turned down for a job over it and, somewhat the opposite, companies seem to appreciate frankness.
I've seen that kind of thinking in the past and it's pretty popular view. I'm just not so sure about this moral aspect. Why do you think it's more moral/ethical to abstain of supporting military? Maybe you won't do this but be sure that in some other country some similarly talented people will. If you (and many others) abstain from it on similar basis you and closest people you know may be in danger of being affected…
It's a moral point. Maybe I'd rather be dead than kill someone.