111–120 of 155 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
that development and advancement of nuclear weapons had not, in fact, been contained.
How do you know that the list wouldn't have been longer otherwise?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
that development and advancement of nuclear weapons had not, in fact, been contained.
How do you know that the list wouldn't have been longer otherwise?
I understand the vision, but how does this work on a global scale. e.g. American employees refuse to build this, but China's don't. Edit: I originally ended with "What would have happened if Germany had a nuclear bomb and America didn't?", but I think it distracted from the point I was trying to make so moving this to an edit. I'm not trying to ask "is the US the bad guy". I'm trying to ask how to balance personal an…
Is there any reason to think that autonomous weapons are a critical strategic capability? It's hard to see what an unpiloted drone can do that a remotely piloted drone can't, other than perhaps human rights violations.
Think of it this way: mines installed in the seabed in wars past were "dumb", in that a passing ship had to happen into it. Imagine systems deployed underwater that were mobile, contained multiple torpedoes, and could strike warships with little to no warning given their small acoustic signature. It's the same principal as a mine (you leave it one spot, hope an enemy ship comes by), but the capabilities are far more advanced. If the system is not at least semi-autonomous than it might as well be a dumb mine again.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
that development and advancement of nuclear weapons had not, in fact, been contained.
How do you know that the list wouldn't have been longer otherwise?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm going to give a shout out here to an episode of the excellent podcast Hardcore History , specifically Episode 59: The Destroyer of Worlds [1]. The development of the atomic bomb created a debate in American policy circles about how the US should react. Within a few years, the same debate occurred over developing thermonuclear weapons. The same question kept coming up: what if the enemy has these weapons and we do…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> every change starts with a few people, and then it grows your opinion is defense contracts are bad my opinion is defense contracts are good who is correct? probably me since 99.9% of Googlers won’t leave over this
[flagged]
> me since 99.9% of Googlers won’t leave over this
Of course maybe not 99.9% but almost certainly >= 95%
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I say stay, and do a subtlety bad job there.
Sabotage? You are openly advocating the internal sabotage of US defense capability?
If the current trajectory continues those “defensive” capabilities will obviously be used against the citizens paying for them..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Defending one's own country is not evil, no matter how much money Qatar pours into Western social media influencers.
It is when "defense" means invasion and subjugation of other countries. All countries pose their military operations as "defense." Inquiring minds should ask if a country surrounded on sides by two oceans with two pacified neighbors has any real threats or merely opportunities for cheap labor, market access, and mineral rights abroad. This has been going on for a very long time (read what Smedley Butler said in "War…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don’t think they’re refusing all military involvement. Autonomous-decision making is the problematic part.
The US military has deployed fully autonomous weapons systems since 1979. If you're worried about that then you're a little late.