5 ms·

I never really understood it, what's so wrong with making weapons?

by lgieron 10y ago

rjsw 10y ago
The jobs are in making a particular kind of weapon.
michaelt 10y ago
Obviously that depends on your personal ethics. A lot of the professional ethics training for structural and automotive engineers, for example, stresses the fact your products shouldn't kill people. Obviously some people make weapons so not everyone believes they have the same obligations.
nurb 10y ago
Well, I work in weapons industry (I wasn't able to do a thesis because public labs doesn't have money). So what's wrong with it? First, things I work on are sold to both sides, in my case to a country well known to shit on human rights... And a few GUI/feature tweak later it's sold to another more respectful one. Also, in a more general way, the main purpose of it is to kill or fear peoples, peoples with different/unaccepted ideas, peoples who disagree with the weapons owner. Does it sound right to you? Of course it's approved by the government, but it sounds way more like a money driven decision than a smart one. And when I ask people how they feel about it, nobody cares, typical responses: "We are not working on a weapon, we are working on --any subsystem that doesn't sounds like a weapon--" "I'm not the one who sell it!" So it's nobodies fault, like during the WW2, "I'm just driving the train, I have nothing to do with deportation"
- lgieron 10y ago
  Without weapons you cannot have an army, and without an army you are instantly conquered by some raging lunatic despot who happens to have one. Having more advanced weapons than the loonies is a blessing IMO.
  - tamana 10y ago
    OK now justify selling weapons to the loonies like 90% of arms manufactures or their customers do. For last 50 years, US enemies fight using US provided weapons. And what happens when the conquering despot is my country (Dick Cheney's team)
    - lgieron 10y ago
      That's foreign policy, that doesn't have much to do with the manufacturing of weapons. Weapons manufacturers just provide weapons to their country and it's the country's (politicians) job to make wise use of it.
  - nikdaheratik 10y ago
    Saying "I don't feel comfortable doing X" is not the same as saying "no one should do X". I'd feel the same about not wanting to work for a casino, or a lab that makes better tobacco products, but oddly enough not a brewery.
whack 10y ago
Mostly that it's a zero-sum endeavor that in the aggregate, doesn't make the world a better place. Imagine if worldwide knowledge of science regressed to 1900 levels. Imagine if worldwide engineering capabilities regressed to 1900 levels. Imagine if worldwide educational opportunities regressed to 1900 levels. We would consider any of these things to be disastrous. Now imagine if worldwide weapons technology regressed to 1900 levels... that doesn't really seem all that bad, does it. You could even come up with a strong argument for it being a good thing. Investing money and effort into making weapons is the literal definition of an arms race. A zero-sum game. If everyone does it, everyone loses. This would obviously never happen but if every single engineer in the world refused to work on developing new weapons, the world would be a better place tomorrow.
- lgieron 10y ago
  The exact same thing can be said about marketing and advertisting - it's a zero-sum arms race game that consumes tons of resources and doesn't contribute anything. And yet, people don't have that much moral reversations about working at Google or Facebook.
  - whack 10y ago
    Among creative folks, there actually is a strong aversion to working in marketing/advertising. Most writers/artists consider such a career to be "selling out." It's their equivalent to engineers working on weapons technology. Regarding Google: They work on a ton of products that genuinely make the world a better place. Gmail, google search, google news etc etc. That does give the company as a whole a halo. Regarding Facebook: I somewhat agree with you that social media in general is overrated, but many others do genuinely believe that it improves their quality of life. I may not buy it myself, but Facebook can make a strong case for how they are making the world a better place by better connecting people.
- tamana 10y ago
  That's a negative sum race, not a zero sum race.

I never really understood it, what's so wrong with making weapons?

by lgieron 10y ago

I never really understood it, what's so wrong with making weapons?

rjsw 10y ago

The jobs are in making a particular kind of weapon.

michaelt 10y ago

Obviously that depends on your personal ethics. A lot of the professional ethics training for structural and automotive engineers, for example, stresses the fact your products shouldn't kill people. Obviously some people make weapons so not everyone believes they have the same obligations.

nurb 10y ago

Well, I work in weapons industry (I wasn't able to do a thesis because public labs doesn't have money). So what's wrong with it? First, things I work on are sold to both sides, in my case to a country well known to shit on human rights... And a few GUI/feature tweak later it's sold to another more respectful one. Also, in a more general way, the main purpose of it is to kill or fear peoples, peoples with different/unaccepted ideas, peoples who disagree with the weapons owner. Does it sound right to you? Of course it's approved by the government, but it sounds way more like a money driven decision than a smart one. And when I ask people how they feel about it, nobody cares, typical responses: "We are not working on a weapon, we are working on --any subsystem that doesn't sounds like a weapon--" "I'm not the one who sell it!" So it's nobodies fault, like during the WW2, "I'm just driving the train, I have nothing to do with deportation"

lgieron 10y ago
Without weapons you cannot have an army, and without an army you are instantly conquered by some raging lunatic despot who happens to have one. Having more advanced weapons than the loonies is a blessing IMO.
- tamana 10y ago
  OK now justify selling weapons to the loonies like 90% of arms manufactures or their customers do. For last 50 years, US enemies fight using US provided weapons. And what happens when the conquering despot is my country (Dick Cheney's team)
  - lgieron 10y ago
    That's foreign policy, that doesn't have much to do with the manufacturing of weapons. Weapons manufacturers just provide weapons to their country and it's the country's (politicians) job to make wise use of it.
- nikdaheratik 10y ago
  Saying "I don't feel comfortable doing X" is not the same as saying "no one should do X". I'd feel the same about not wanting to work for a casino, or a lab that makes better tobacco products, but oddly enough not a brewery.

whack 10y ago

Mostly that it's a zero-sum endeavor that in the aggregate, doesn't make the world a better place. Imagine if worldwide knowledge of science regressed to 1900 levels. Imagine if worldwide engineering capabilities regressed to 1900 levels. Imagine if worldwide educational opportunities regressed to 1900 levels. We would consider any of these things to be disastrous. Now imagine if worldwide weapons technology regressed to 1900 levels... that doesn't really seem all that bad, does it. You could even come up with a strong argument for it being a good thing. Investing money and effort into making weapons is the literal definition of an arms race. A zero-sum game. If everyone does it, everyone loses. This would obviously never happen but if every single engineer in the world refused to work on developing new weapons, the world would be a better place tomorrow.

lgieron 10y ago
The exact same thing can be said about marketing and advertisting - it's a zero-sum arms race game that consumes tons of resources and doesn't contribute anything. And yet, people don't have that much moral reversations about working at Google or Facebook.
- whack 10y ago
  Among creative folks, there actually is a strong aversion to working in marketing/advertising. Most writers/artists consider such a career to be "selling out." It's their equivalent to engineers working on weapons technology. Regarding Google: They work on a ton of products that genuinely make the world a better place. Gmail, google search, google news etc etc. That does give the company as a whole a halo. Regarding Facebook: I somewhat agree with you that social media in general is overrated, but many others do genuinely believe that it improves their quality of life. I may not buy it myself, but Facebook can make a strong case for how they are making the world a better place by better connecting people.
tamana 10y ago
That's a negative sum race, not a zero sum race.