4 ms·
Not sure why you were downvoted for this, especially your last sentence. I think it's an important perspective, and as it relates to the author, if he _had_ hel
by lr4444lr 11y ago
Not sure why you were downvoted for this, especially your last sentence. I think it's an important perspective, and as it relates to the author, if he _had_ helped "build smart cruise missiles that could find their way to their targets", that might have greatly helped lessen civilian deaths during war. He says "I will not devote my life's work toward making warfare more effective". Sticking to principle is admirable, but choosing not to use one's intellectual gifts in ways that could reduce innocent suffering is also a choice with consequences. It's just a lot easier for people to ignore "how many I could have prevented from dying" than "how many my work has been the cause of their death." Mikhail Kalashnikov had a much humbler perspective when people asked him about the AK-47 (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jul/30/russia.kateconnolly http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/jul/30/russia.kateconn...).
- mcguire 11y agoThis same argument supports your favorite NSA surveillance program. In fact, the assumption you are making is that the use of violence is a constant, but the effect of smart cruise missiles, etc., is to make it more palatable and attractive.
- sitkack 11y agoThere is a Jevon's Paradox with the use of drones. Look at the total hours flown thus far. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox