4 ms·
The article says, > Like any technology, we need to consider the ethics of its application carefully so we don’t build tools that are open to abuse, or worst c
by cryptoz 9y ago
The article says,
> Like any technology, we need to consider the ethics of its application carefully so we don’t build tools that are open to abuse, or worst case, terminators that can travel through time to kill people.
So no, they took the opportunity to clear up any fears or concerns about the project and used it to make a really, really scary joke about robots specifically designed to identify individuals by using cameras and kill them with guns.
Nobody at this project gave one real thought about ethics. Ethically, you can't make that joke about your software, it's nauseating.
- headsoup 9y agoMaybe they gave thought to their own ethics, but they likely didn't consider implications of being useful for someone without said ethics.
- popcorncowboy 9y agoYes. This. The terrifying thing is that this type of application "demo" is being built by smart people who are already fully aware of the _theoretical_ concept of ethical violations being enabled by software. And yet refuse to connect the obvious dots to the dystopian, anti-human capabilities enabled by the tools they're building. "Oh yes well we didn't mean it for THAT". WAY more respect (fear) if they came out and just honestly explained all the revenue generating capabilities this could extract from users. Better business. Less disingenuous. I certainly feel MUCH safer knowing that my software could FORCE me to spend my attention on it for whatever reason. Bravo Machine-Box, really helping make the world a better place.