Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Anonymous Google Employees Voted Arms Control Persons of the Year

armscontrol.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 159 posts

Re: Anonymous Google Employees Voted Arms Control Persons of the Year

#51

Post by darawk »

the_duke wrote: post #46
NotAnEconomist wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the media has a lot to do with that. They run stories about how the military bombs some civilians while fighting jihadists, but not about how those same jihadists routinely round up and torture children, kill scores of locals, etc. Outside of Iraq, which fuck Bush, can you name something about the "War on Terror" you think we'd be better off not doing? I think it's a really shallow view to say it's better to…

You seem to be implying that it's perfectly fine for the US to bomb a family home if a terrorist is in there, accepting civilian casualties, because they might harm the population? Who gets to make that determination? A random drone pilot? An officer? Also please don't pretend any of the US military engagements since WW2 had any other purpose than serving national interest.

> Who gets to make that determination?

We do. Because we can. That is how the world works. If you don't make the decision, it gets made for you in the other direction.

> Also please don't pretend any of the US military engagements since WW2 had any other purpose than serving national interest.

This is a pretty childish sentiment. Reasons for war are complex. The world is actually a complicated place, and admits multiple concurrent motivations.

Re: Anonymous Google Employees Voted Arms Control Persons of the Year

#52

Post by mrguyorama »

rifung wrote: post #42
daviross wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Recent news cycles keep revealing yet another piece military equipment suffering from software weaknesses It's difficult to say this isn't a net moral good, as things currently stand. Competent tools put to immoral ends aren't somehow more moral than incompetent tools. The only fix is to change the ends.

> It's difficult to say this isn't a net moral good, as things currently stand. I disagree but am open to being persuaded otherwise. I don't consider national defense to be an immoral goal. I believe it's unrealistic for there to exist a world without weapons. That being the case, I believe it's important for us to constantly improve our military capability otherwise we will be left behind.

>I don't consider national defense to be an immoral goal

My personal opinion is that what the United States has been doing for over 20 years has not been national defense

Re: Anonymous Google Employees Voted Arms Control Persons of the Year

#53

Post by rifung »

drak0n1c wrote: post #6

Unfortunately, the divide between Silicon Valley and the Pentagon will be bad for national security in the long run. Recent news cycles keep revealing yet another piece military equipment suffering from software weaknesses. Technology does not stand still, if Russia and China have more of their most talented engineers willing to work on national projects than us that will inevitably lead to a competence gap. Here is…

> Unfortunately, the divide between Silicon Valley and the Pentagon will be bad for national security in the long run

I work for Google, opinions are my own.

I agree. However I think in the case of Google and most other companies, the issue is a little more.. awkward? Besides the fact we have offices in other countries, we also employ many people in the US from other countries. Obviously those people may have very different feelings about working on a project for US national security. I don't think I've been on a single team at Google which did not have people from abroad.

Re: Anonymous Google Employees Voted Arms Control Persons of the Year

#54

Post by [deleted] »

NotAnEconomist wrote: post #35
mattnewton wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article makes it feel like these changes happened because less people are enlisting or know people enlisting. I think that’s just another symptom of how some military programs lost a lot of legitimacy in the minds of some of my generation who were coming of age around the war on terror. It’s hard to feel like the good guys in a lot of these issues like drone warfare against non-combatants, and so the military was…

I think the media has a lot to do with that. They run stories about how the military bombs some civilians while fighting jihadists, but not about how those same jihadists routinely round up and torture children, kill scores of locals, etc. Outside of Iraq, which fuck Bush, can you name something about the "War on Terror" you think we'd be better off not doing? I think it's a really shallow view to say it's better to…

[deleted]

Re: Anonymous Google Employees Voted Arms Control Persons of the Year

#55

Post by ryanmercer »

izacus wrote: post #40
ryanmercer wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the person you asked but I suspect their comment is along the lines of how Google employees threw a fit when learning about working on a military project (Project Maven) fairly recently but didn't make any noticeable objections when Google was like "why yes China, we will gladly build a custom censored search engine just for you" as well as opening the Google AI China Center which you can basically guarantee is l…

Huh, there was certanly "a fit" inside Google around Dragonfly as well - and the only big corporation that actively assists China at this point is Apple. So I'm not quite sure what the OP meant?

I feel like Maven got saber rattling from employees at least one order of magnitude more than Dragonfly. At least I saw a LOT more press and general discussion.

Re: Anonymous Google Employees Voted Arms Control Persons of the Year

#56

Post by JarlUlvi »

ve55 wrote: post #3

But yet all 4,000 of them still work for the largest surveillance corporation that has ever existed. At least now they think they have the moral high ground.

Google is like Facebook

A morass of compromised individuals, claiming the moral highground while attacking freedom of speech, whilst spying on our every move, and selling our data to the highest bidder/advendor. All of this, with, or without your permission.

Re: Anonymous Google Employees Voted Arms Control Persons of the Year

#58

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

drak0n1c wrote: post #6

Unfortunately, the divide between Silicon Valley and the Pentagon will be bad for national security in the long run. Recent news cycles keep revealing yet another piece military equipment suffering from software weaknesses. Technology does not stand still, if Russia and China have more of their most talented engineers willing to work on national projects than us that will inevitably lead to a competence gap. Here is…

SV devs don't contribute significant volumes of code to military equipment. They're mostly being used to build the panopticon. The incumbent contractors have plenty of staff who will do the work others refuse.

Re: Anonymous Google Employees Voted Arms Control Persons of the Year

#59

Post by JohnFen »

mattnewton wrote: post #19
drak0n1c wrote: post #6

Unfortunately, the divide between Silicon Valley and the Pentagon will be bad for national security in the long run. Recent news cycles keep revealing yet another piece military equipment suffering from software weaknesses. Technology does not stand still, if Russia and China have more of their most talented engineers willing to work on national projects than us that will inevitably lead to a competence gap. Here is…

The article makes it feel like these changes happened because less people are enlisting or know people enlisting. I think that’s just another symptom of how some military programs lost a lot of legitimacy in the minds of some of my generation who were coming of age around the war on terror. It’s hard to feel like the good guys in a lot of these issues like drone warfare against non-combatants, and so the military was…

> I think that’s just another symptom of how some military programs lost a lot of legitimacy in the minds of some of my generation who were coming of age around the war on terror.

It's not just your generation. I'm in my 50s and this opinion isn't rare in my age group either.

Re: Anonymous Google Employees Voted Arms Control Persons of the Year

#60

Post by drak0n1c »

tengbretson wrote: post #47
mLuby wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but it is defensible that a greater balance of power might be a net good for the world. (Also the devil is in defining net good). And it is also quite defensible to restrict hard power to ethical channels. There's a reason we don't use chemical weapons even though they would definitely give us an edge: The moral harm outweighs the tactical benefit. (Until it doesn't, as we saw in Syria.)

I don't want a balance of power. I want most moral actor (however flawed they may be) to have a technical and tactical advantage over those that would behave immorally. The world didn't get together and unanimously decide to stop using chemical weapons. The few strongest forces in the world decided that no one was to use chemical weapons, and by that threat of force the world became a better place.

Exactly, I don't see how setting up another cold war for the sake of proportionality will be good for the world. In the cold war nations still engaged in brutal proxy wars, and everyone lived in fear of a massive hot war. Doesn't seem preferable or more stable.
Post reply on HN