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

Where things stand with the Department of War

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

631–640 of 862 posts

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#631

Post by dotancohen »

XorNot wrote: post #401
dotancohen wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> afraid to recognize Taiwan's independence. Does Taiwan claim independence? I thought that both the government in Beijing and the government in Taipei both claim that all of China is united, and that they are the legitimate government of that united entity.

Taiwan buys military equipment and operates it's own military very much like it is independent of China and views Chinese troops in it's territory as a threat.

Correct. However "in it's territory" includes inside mainland China.

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#633

Post by tdb7893 »

j-bos wrote: post #536
tdb7893 wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went to a military high school up until 2011 and never remember hearing it. My dad and grandpa were military for 20 years each and I've never heard either say it. It definitely hasn't been used broadly in the US for very long (maybe in very specific circles). Even my friends who work as engineers for defense contractors now have never called people "war fighters" around me.

It's been on thr MRE's for decades, hasn't it? At least that's what I remember seeing after disaster relief came in.

Idk, it might've been used on stuff in the past. My point was that it wasn't a thing that normal people (even normal people in the military) would say. The person I'm responding to described it as "common use" for the last couple decades and that just doesn't match up with my experience at all.

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#634

Post by bonesss »

wartywhoa23 wrote: post #549
dhosek wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet Gen X is the demographic that fell hardest for Trump.

Gen X is the demographic that doesn't believe that elections are anything else but a clown show.

Based only on lived experience.

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#635

Post by amelius »

miohtama wrote: post #430
hglaser wrote: post #18

It is incredible how far the overton window has moved on this issue. When I graduated in 2007, it was common for tech companies to refuse to let their systems be used for war, and it was an ordinary thing when some of my graduating classmates refused to work at companies that did let their systems be used for war. Those refusals were on moral grounds. Now Anthropic wants to have two narrow exceptions, on pragmatic an…

When I graduated, companies had mottos like Don't do evil.

And did they stick to it?

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#636

Post by dotancohen »

malfist wrote: post #580
dotancohen wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Perhaps Trump shouldn't have ripped up the treaty Obama achieved with Iran. The one where we could pop in unannounced at any time to inspect facilities to make sure there's no nuclear bomb making capabilities.

[flagged]

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#637

Post by brazzy »

myrmidon wrote: post #596
alex43578 wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you think a continuation of the firebombing campaign and an invasion of the Japanese home islands would have resulted in fewer deaths of civilians (particularly of the 'volunteer fighting corps')? That's to say nothing of the deaths in a potential US/USSR conflict that goes hot without the Damocles Sword of MAD...

This is a false dichotomy. In the words of the post-war US strategic bombing survey: "Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts, and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945, and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russi…

I don't think regarding it as a "demonstration" is accurate either.

Nuclear bombs appear as uniquely horrifying and requiring special justification only in hindsight. Back then, it was just another type of bomb. The thought process behind dropping it was simply "let's hit them as hard as we can until they surrender".

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#638

Post by qsera »

the_af wrote: post #609
qsera wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, but it takes time. Like we have solar now. People talk about how it saves environment. But I think another similar win would be reduction in dependency on oil, and countries won't have to go to war over oil. But it takes time... But it seems what technology gives, technology takes away. Because new technologies comes with its own resource requirements. And the cycle looks like it will go on...

> Yes, but it takes time. So be it. This doesn't excuse going to war with neighbors because you want to steal their stuff. Learn to live with yours.

Learn? Can you learn to live without eating? Do you know what happens when an economy collapse?

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#639

Post by GJim »

jedberg wrote: post #358
hax0ron3 wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The late 90s were full of media that questioned reality and authority - like X-Files, The Matrix, Dark City, all sorts of websites about conspiracy theories and UFOs, etc. The zeitgeist was full of speculation about hidden truths. The cultural mood was defiant and sardonic. There was rap, rap-rock, Beavis and Butthead, Fight Club, Office Space... One of the most popular pro wrestlers in the world played a character w…

Gen-X was making the popular new art at the time. It was a strong reflection of the feelings of our generation. We were (maybe still are?) known for not liking authority.

> Gen-X was making the popular new art at the time. It was a strong reflection of the feelings of our generation.

I posted this in a thread about the 90's film 'Hackers'.....

In the 1990's and for us Gen-X'ers, the worst thing you could do was to sell out; to take the mans money instead of keeping your integrity. Calling people and bands 'sell outs' (sometimes without justification!) was to insult them.

With the rise of 'influencers' the opposite appears to be the case; people go out of their way to sell out and are praised for doing so. This is a massive change in the cultural landscape which perhaps many born in the 2000's aren't aware of. (Being aware of this helps give some perspective to Gen-X media and films like Hackers).

BTW: Remember the 'product scene' in the film Waynes World?

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#640

Post by dotancohen »

adrian_b wrote: post #468
dotancohen wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Trump has already claimed that he has destroyed all nuclear capability of Iran at the previous attack done by USA against Iran. Claiming now that this other attack has the same purpose makes certain that USA has lied either at the previous attack or at the current attack. When the government of a country is a proven liar, no allegations about how dangerous another country is are credible. Moreover, just before the at…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN