Google Workers Urge C.E.O. To Pull Out of Pentagon A.I. Project • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Workers Urge C.E.O. To Pull Out of Pentagon A.I. Project

#481

Post by Falling3 » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 8:36 PM UTC

gfo wrote: post #391

GiorgioG wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only in the USA is it normal to think that people should have the right to kill in self defense. If that's the case, I don't want to live anywhere else. If someone breaks into my home in the middle of the night, they pose a deadly threat to my family. In what country would you not feel the same way? > Even more, many think they should be able to defend themselves from the state. Not all states are benevolent, nor a…

Why must an intruder, who may be there just to steal something and not harm others, immediately have to pay for their actions with their life? Do gun owners truly believe that they can band together and stop the entirety of the United States military anymore? The same people who are large proponents of the 2nd Amendment also seem to encourage a massive defense budget which seems backwards to me.

>Why must an intruder, who may be there just to steal something and not harm others, immediately have to pay for their actions with their life?

They shouldn't. But what guarantee does someone have that the intruder won't harm them?

Re: Google Workers Urge C.E.O. To Pull Out of Pentagon A.I. Project

#482

Post by blackflame7000 » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 8:37 PM UTC

richmarr wrote: post #169

zaroth wrote: post #141

It boggles my mind, with the current state of affairs, the number of people actively organizing to eliminate or curtail our fundamental human rights. It seems to me that 1st and 2nd amendment rights are both under particularly intense bombardment these days.

I'm not sure if you meant to imply that the 2nd amendment is a fundamental human right but if so I think that's a bit of a stretch. 'Fundamental rights' (under US law) I think is defensible as fundamental is treated as an alias for constitutional so guns are in. 'Fundamental human rights' to me implies broad and fundamental applicability, i.e. the UN declarations and covenants on human rights, which don't iterate gun…

The 2nd amendment states that the right to bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. This implies that the right to gun ownership predates the constitution because you can not infringe on a right that doesn't yet exist. Thus our forefathers saw it as an inalienable right that predates our nation.

Re: Google Workers Urge C.E.O. To Pull Out of Pentagon A.I. Project

#483

Post by calcifer » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 8:37 PM UTC

wildmusings wrote: post #350

titzer wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Democracies are in retreat around the world, and I only hope we wake up before it is too late. What are you advocating? Arming governments with autonomous killer drones in order to "protect democracy"? Because the world is a "dangerous place"? I don't even...

If we refuse to develop the technology, our enemies will anyway. Imagine a world where Nazi Germany developed nuclear weapons.

Ah yes, the "I have to do evil things because if I didn't, someone else would" argument...

Just think about what you wrote: "our enemies". Why do you (whichever country you are from) have enemies in the first place? What did your country do to make others hate it? A lot of people seem to focus on how to defend against "those who hate us" without spending a passing thought on the why of it.

Solving "why" also solves the "how", but those who profit from conflict have no interest in the former, as their livelihood depends on the latter.

Re: Google Workers Urge C.E.O. To Pull Out of Pentagon A.I. Project

#484

Post by kiliantics » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 8:38 PM UTC

And this is why tech workers need to unionise. This petition is a weak statement that probably will have no effect. Unless these workers could pose a real threat to Google by threatening a strike action, Google has no need to change anything.

Furthermore, if the workers really stood by their moral convictions, they'd use their collective power to tackle the issue more directly than by just appealing to Google. Companies like Google are like the railroads of the 19th century. They comprise the major infrastructure of modern society. A union at Google could threaten to effectively halt all institutional operations of governments or other companies in order to influence their actions. Is facebook manipulating voters? Okay, no more gmail for facebook till they stop. Is the government going to bomb Yemen? Alright, we're shutting down government accounts.

As others in the thread have also said, I'm doubtful many of these signatories will quit their cozy jobs if Google doesn't back down. Without the group solidarity and pressure from a union, most individual workers just don't have any good incentive to put their money where their mouth is.

Re: Google Workers Urge C.E.O. To Pull Out of Pentagon A.I. Project

#485

Post by white-flame » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 8:39 PM UTC

gfo wrote: post #391

GiorgioG wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only in the USA is it normal to think that people should have the right to kill in self defense. If that's the case, I don't want to live anywhere else. If someone breaks into my home in the middle of the night, they pose a deadly threat to my family. In what country would you not feel the same way? > Even more, many think they should be able to defend themselves from the state. Not all states are benevolent, nor a…

Why must an intruder, who may be there just to steal something and not harm others, immediately have to pay for their actions with their life? Do gun owners truly believe that they can band together and stop the entirety of the United States military anymore? The same people who are large proponents of the 2nd Amendment also seem to encourage a massive defense budget which seems backwards to me.

> Do gun owners truly believe that they can band together and stop the entirety of the United States military anymore?

Note that the US military is sworn to the constitution, not to any current administration. When anti-citizen measures are proposed, the military aligns with the citizens.

Re: Google Workers Urge C.E.O. To Pull Out of Pentagon A.I. Project

#486

Post by humanrebar » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 8:40 PM UTC

tc313 wrote: post #140

treebeard901 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The classification of cryptography as munitions was an interesting choice. The first amendment may protect domestic encryption capabilities as stated by the wikipedia article. From a legal standpoint, does encryption being classified as munitions also put it into second amendment territory? As information becomes weaponized, it's an interesting thought. The first amendment is arguably more vulnerable these days, so I…

IANAL but I’m pretty sure the second amendment only applies to guns; you can’t walk around with an RPG on your shoulder.

There's a school of thought that the word "arms" in the Constitution might have referred mainly to sidearms, not to canons, catapults, warships, etc. The theory is that there were other words like "artillery" to describe larger weapons.

Re: Google Workers Urge C.E.O. To Pull Out of Pentagon A.I. Project

#487

Post by CamperBob2 » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 8:40 PM UTC

tolgerias wrote: post #276

harimau777 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd argue that fundamental human rights means rights that exist inherently regardless of whether the UN or any given country recognizes them. My feeling is that people have a right to self defense, which would require them to have access to some effective weapon. In theory that could be a club or blade rather than a firearm; however, currently firearms are the only (somewhat) socially acceptable weapon to carry in th…

self defense is a human right only in a lawless society. The existence of the state makes it necessary for it to have the monopoly of the application of force, and all matters should be resolved in a civil court of law. Only in the USA is it normal to think that people should have the right to kill in self defense. Even more, many think they should be able to defend themselves from the state.. while that is the defin…

The existence of the state makes it necessary for it to have the monopoly of the application of force

Note that like most other points made in discussions involving "rights," this is an opinion, presented as if it were an objective fact.

Another opinion is that you have only the rights that you can defend. That one, at least, has some empirical proof behind it.

Re: Google Workers Urge C.E.O. To Pull Out of Pentagon A.I. Project

#488

Post by VikingCoder » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 8:40 PM UTC

gaius wrote: post #264

Florin_Andrei wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that's one extreme. The other extreme is that some folks actually have a conscience. Reality is probably on a continuum in between.

The other extreme is that some folks actually have a conscience Those people are not working in AdTech.

You want to have that conversation with them? Because some of them are right here. In fact some of them just got shot at yesterday.

Is it hyperbole, or do you honestly feel that trying to connect users with products they might like is inherently unconscionable?

Re: Google Workers Urge C.E.O. To Pull Out of Pentagon A.I. Project

#489

Post by wilsonnb » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 8:41 PM UTC

ocdtrekkie wrote: post #475

wilsonnb wrote: post #447

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you refer to them as extra-judicial killings?

A non-military entity (the CIA), which should not be operating military hardware (but does), assassinates targets without due process (or really, any hard evidence at all), in countries we aren't at war with (formally or otherwise). Depending on our relationship with the country in question, we may or may not bother to let that country know we're going to kill some of their citizens ahead of time.

Putting aside moral issues with the CIA, what's the legal reason that they should not be operating military hardware?

As far as I know, CIA assassinations of foreign citizens aren't illegal as long as they take place outside of the US.

There was at least one instance of a drone strike killing one or two American citizens which is definitely extra-judicial. Most drone strikes do not kill American citizens so referring to drone strikes in general as extra-judicial doesn't seem accurate to me.

I would like to clarify that I don't necessarily think that the US's use of drone strikes is morally correct. I just think it's not correct to refer to it as extra-judicial.

Re: Google Workers Urge C.E.O. To Pull Out of Pentagon A.I. Project

#490

Post by chiefalchemist » Wed, Apr 04, 2018, 8:43 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #96

chiefalchemist wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The funding come from the DoD because any other appropriate entity is financially starved because the DoD gets so much money. The latest budget provides them: $700,000,000,000 Or as Obama said in the 2016 State of the Union: "We spend more on defense than the next 8 nations COMBINED." Keep in mind, most of that 8 are allies. I struggle to see why we should be praising a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Naming it 'defense' is already a huge stretch. I realize every country does this but it is as much or more about projecting power all across the globe as it is defense.

It's not Defense. But I was trying to keep it simple.