8 ms·

The moral and ethical issues aren't unidirectionally bad - you're building things that keep your side safe/secure and ensure a win. Those are your friends and n

The moral and ethical issues aren't unidirectionally bad - you're building things that keep your side safe/secure and ensure a win. Those are your friends and neighbors on the battlefield - they aren't unthinking stormtroopers, they're the people you went to school with. Even guided missiles, which seem indiscriminate, are much more precise and limit collateral damage. 50 years ago the alternative was carpet bombing - a guided missile produces much more targeted damage. You can argue that guided missiles save lives - if you want someone dead enough that you're willing to kill everyone around them, having an option to just knock them out seems much more humane (especially to the kids on the nearby playground). Plus, I'd absolutely hate to be the side that didn't uparmor with autonomous systems - you'd get creamed. Like it or not, it's a part of the battlefield now. I'm not a fan of us bringing back tactical nuclear (low yield) munitions, but that's apparently also happening. AND the work can be totally badass, the stability/pay is good, and you just get more valuable as you age (unlike being, say, a front end web developer). Plus seeing something you built go out to the range and tear apart a tank/knock down an RPG/launch into space/whatever is really, really dang cool.

lawlessone 7y ago
>they aren't unthinking stormtroopers, They aren't but the bots and drones are.
- mullingitover 7y ago
  Those aren't unthinking bots, those are my caretakers in my old age.
vangelis 7y ago
Maybe we can set up an automated slaughter factory for immigrants from the global south at the border. It'll be pretty dang cool.
- 15155 7y ago
  https://www.wired.com/2007/06/for-years-and-y/ https://www.wired.com/2007/06/for-years-and-y/ If these existed, would people continue attempt to cross illegally? The thought-provoking argument is that these pieces of technology, if foolproof, would go completely unused as people inherently value their lives (but not laws.)
  - notahacker 7y ago
    140 documented victims of the clearly demarked killing zones of the Berlin Wall suggests they probably wouldn't go unused. Also can't imagine such technology being successful at actually stopping migrant flows somewhere like the US border unless the government moved to line the coast with them...
- analognoise 7y ago
  Any real technology has dual uses; I cannot say that the things I've worked on are always a positive good for humanity as a whole, they depend on the people wielding them. I wish I could have lived in a bubble, developing "tech" that didn't matter and was only positive, but even the most disconnected web jockey is paid for by the surveillance-capitalism dollars of the modern internet. That tech might be worse for society overall - it gave us the creeping global eye at a pace faster than legislation could keep up with it, or that society could adapt, and it seemed innocuous at first.
nickpsecurity 7y ago
"50 years ago the alternative was carpet bombing" No, it was snipers or specialist teams if it was about taking out one person or a small group with minimal collateral damage. Carpet bombing was for taking out unknown opponents in a specific area with no concern for collateral damage. They could switch off stuff like drones and guided missiles to get more precision using the trained specialists. This is exactly what Richard Marcinko of SEAL 6 wanted after watching SIGINT and technical solutions screw up missions for so long that the human soldiers then had to salvage.

lawlessone 7y ago

>they aren't unthinking stormtroopers, They aren't but the bots and drones are.

mullingitover 7y ago
Those aren't unthinking bots, those are my caretakers in my old age.

vangelis 7y ago

Maybe we can set up an automated slaughter factory for immigrants from the global south at the border. It'll be pretty dang cool.

15155 7y ago
https://www.wired.com/2007/06/for-years-and-y/ https://www.wired.com/2007/06/for-years-and-y/ If these existed, would people continue attempt to cross illegally? The thought-provoking argument is that these pieces of technology, if foolproof, would go completely unused as people inherently value their lives (but not laws.)
- notahacker 7y ago
  140 documented victims of the clearly demarked killing zones of the Berlin Wall suggests they probably wouldn't go unused. Also can't imagine such technology being successful at actually stopping migrant flows somewhere like the US border unless the government moved to line the coast with them...
analognoise 7y ago
Any real technology has dual uses; I cannot say that the things I've worked on are always a positive good for humanity as a whole, they depend on the people wielding them. I wish I could have lived in a bubble, developing "tech" that didn't matter and was only positive, but even the most disconnected web jockey is paid for by the surveillance-capitalism dollars of the modern internet. That tech might be worse for society overall - it gave us the creeping global eye at a pace faster than legislation could keep up with it, or that society could adapt, and it seemed innocuous at first.

nickpsecurity 7y ago

"50 years ago the alternative was carpet bombing" No, it was snipers or specialist teams if it was about taking out one person or a small group with minimal collateral damage. Carpet bombing was for taking out unknown opponents in a specific area with no concern for collateral damage. They could switch off stuff like drones and guided missiles to get more precision using the trained specialists. This is exactly what Richard Marcinko of SEAL 6 wanted after watching SIGINT and technical solutions screw up missions for so long that the human soldiers then had to salvage.