Every 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.
Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
501–510 of 516 posts
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#502These 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…
Yes. And that's the rub. I had the good fortune to work in research for the military for almost 10 years. They have more patience and willingness to adapt than any commercial company I've known. Their time horizon spans a much longer interval than most corporations. Did neural networks out of the PDP groups work in the '80s, and when things were too slow, they went yup and bought a bunch of Mercury computer cards to speed stuff up without squawking or delaying. Now I do work in stereoscopic machine vision. I'm pretty certain that biological or machine, the lowest levels of the visual stack are just targeting systems based on feedback loops. Here I agree with Dr. Russell at Bezerkely. We must not, can not, make autonomous killing machines because the consequences are potentially too catastrophic. So I refuse to work on anything resembling autonomous mobile weapons systems, as do many many others in this field. This has happened before - we were playing with enhanced radiation weapons in the '70s and '80s (neutron bomb), and over time pretty much every participant decided it was a very bad horrible no good idea. I would argue that for talented players capable of dragging the future into the present, the issue is not that the military is bad, it's whether a specific application they want is unequivocally bad. It's not about who, it's about what.
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#503Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doubt that to be honest. In theory maybe, but in a real life scenario I don't think there are many people who let themself (and their loved ones) to be killed than to kill. Even though I have a lot of respect for Ghandi, I am not sure if I could respect someone who would let his family murdered, out of a moral point.
Here's how I see it: I'm not going to be held accountable for someone else's actions. I'm going to be held accountable for my actions. I'm not going to plan ahead to make it easier to kill someone in some as-yet hypothetical self-defense scenario.
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#504Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#505Earlier quoted context omitted.
Name 1 Major thing NATO or the UN has done without US support. The idea that they have any power outside what the US sanctions is to be pretty ignorant of the reality of power in world affairs.
You're missing the point. It's not that NATO and the UN are powerful or effective as bodies independent of the US, it's that their greatest achievements have occurred without direct US military intervention. NATO and the UN both benefit (and suffer) from the power and presence of the US military, but their proudest moments (the German economic miracle, smallpox eradication, historic decreases in child mortality and m…
- At some time between 1945 and 1950 the USSR likely would have moved the Iron Curtain all the way to the Atlantic, and quite possibly to the west coast of Britain or even Ireland. Practically anyone who lived under Communist rule in Central- and Eastern Europe would agree that this would have been a Very Bad Thing.
- In the summer of 1950 the Korean peninsula would most certainly have been reunited under the Kim Il Sung regime — this damned near happened anyway, when the U.S. and ROK forces were nearly pushed into the sea at Pusan — and the South Korean economic miracle would never have occurred, to say nothing of the fact that the North Korean gulag would be that much larger.
- Japan probably would have rearmed, and who knows what that would have led to.
Oh, and absent the freedom of the seas heretofore provided by the United States Navy, the world's economy would look very, very different.
As to "smart policy and liberal principles," those are certainly important. But as President Obama said in his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech, nonviolence wouldn't have stopped Hitler's armies.
Disclosure: I'm biased — I'm both a veteran and the son of a career U.S. military officer.
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#506Earlier quoted context omitted.
> because of defense contractors working on a military project (ARPANET). Ehh, kinda, but not really. Less military contractors and more research grants given to academics. The difference is subtle, but an academic institution is a public institution focused on advancing science and teaching it to the public. A corporation or contractor is in it for the profit. Notably, the academics involved were able to publish the…
Cerf (Stanford) and Kahn (DARPA) designed TCP. But BBN (now a subsidiary of Raytheon) built ARPANET.
Like... while getting his Ph.D so I'm not wrong about the academic link. Though sure, it was literally built by the military industrial complex, but the original implication that the military somehow has a primacy over an idea that was going to take off one way or another is still absurd.
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#507Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US military is mighty, but not terribly effective. I mean, we're 17 years into the second gulf war. 17 years and we still can't pull-out because we screwed up the first one so royally. I'm writing this from a refugee community center here in Istanbul, the Ad'Dar Center, where I volunteer a couple of hours every day helping helping kids with their lessons, especially in English and Math, cooking, making music, tal…
Your comment history seems to show a made-up version of events where you also claim the US did nothing in WW2. I'm not sure what narrative you're trying to push but your personal history seems suspect on this basis, and the anonymous username doesn't help. You're also conflating foreign policy with military strength. They are not the same and I'm talking about the latter. How that power is used and whether it's alway…
By all means, have a strong national defense, but at some point the rest of the world will decide it's time to join together to destroy the 'murikkkan empire? The rest of the world would be a lot happier without having our freedom forced upon them through violence.
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#508These 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…
As a Brit, I'm very grateful to the Americans. By antagonising a substantial proportion of the global population, you've really taken the heat off us. The people of Afghanistan have a long and justifiable tradition of hating the British, mainly thanks to the three Anglo-Afghan wars of 1839, 1878 and 1919. Since the American-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, we seem almost quaint by comparison; our brutal imperiali…
Maybe in Northern Ireland? Though it's mostly the British buring Irish flags...
Re: Google Engineers Refused to Build Security Tool to Win Military Contracts
#509Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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
#510Earlier quoted context omitted.
Name 1 Major thing NATO or the UN has done without US support. The idea that they have any power outside what the US sanctions is to be pretty ignorant of the reality of power in world affairs.
You're missing the point. It's not that NATO and the UN are powerful or effective as bodies independent of the US, it's that their greatest achievements have occurred without direct US military intervention. NATO and the UN both benefit (and suffer) from the power and presence of the US military, but their proudest moments (the German economic miracle, smallpox eradication, historic decreases in child mortality and m…