3 ms·

>The most shocking angle of all, is how willing people are to build this technology - like, the cool factor overrides any moral or ethical issues People tell t

by matmann2001 7y ago

>The most shocking angle of all, is how willing people are to build this technology - like, the cool factor overrides any moral or ethical issues People tell themselves all sorts of things to justify this kind of cognitive dissonance. The predominant arguments I've seen are: A) Technology isn't good/bad, it's how you use it. And fortunately for the engineers, the tech will be used far away by people they'll never meet and the details of which will remain classified. Out of sight, out of mind. B) If we don't build it, someone else will. And we don't want this tech to fall into our enemy's hands first, do we? Best defense is a good offense.

setr 7y ago
>B) If we don't build it, someone else will. And we don't want this tech to fall into our enemy's hands first, do we? Best defense is a good offense. I'm not actually clear on what's incorrect about this logic -- unless there's some kind of agreement across all superpowers not to research this subject, or the subject itself is not actually beneficial to research.. why would you assume that none of your potential adversaries are researching it? And once you recognize that they might research it, and that if they did research it, and you didn't, they might switch from potential adversary to actual adversary (as they now believe themselves to have the upper hand), the only moral and ethical thing to do ... is to research it yourself! Perhaps the more moral and ethical thing is to give away the technology once you have it, so that you yourself won't have the chance to be aggressor ... but otherwise, I'm not sure how you can justify not researching it (war, and the potential for it, exists regardless of whether you want it to)
- astazangasta 7y ago
  The main problem with this logic is it is much easier to steal technology than invent it, so by doing this you are not only assuring your enemies will end up with that scary tech, you are building it for them.
- matmann2001 7y ago
  > I'm not actually clear on what's incorrect about this logic It's this same logic that gave us The Cold War.
  - setr 7y ago
    yes, and? Without an absurd premise (eg pretending war isn't an ever-present threat for any nation-state), and without requiring some Oracle or superior governing body to determine behaviors without the fog of war, what superior and general logic should have been applied that would have avoided the cold war? That this particular bit of logic leads us to the Cold War is well and fine; was the Cold War avoidable with some other reasonable mode of operation?
    - matmann2001 7y ago
      > what superior and general logic should have been applied that would have avoided the cold war? The logic that the entire population is stuck on this planet (then and now for the time being), and the resources/ideologies being fought over don't mean a thing if everyone is dead.

setr 7y ago

>B) If we don't build it, someone else will. And we don't want this tech to fall into our enemy's hands first, do we? Best defense is a good offense. I'm not actually clear on what's incorrect about this logic -- unless there's some kind of agreement across all superpowers not to research this subject, or the subject itself is not actually beneficial to research.. why would you assume that none of your potential adversaries are researching it? And once you recognize that they might research it, and that if they did research it, and you didn't, they might switch from potential adversary to actual adversary (as they now believe themselves to have the upper hand), the only moral and ethical thing to do ... is to research it yourself! Perhaps the more moral and ethical thing is to give away the technology once you have it, so that you yourself won't have the chance to be aggressor ... but otherwise, I'm not sure how you can justify not researching it (war, and the potential for it, exists regardless of whether you want it to)

astazangasta 7y ago
The main problem with this logic is it is much easier to steal technology than invent it, so by doing this you are not only assuring your enemies will end up with that scary tech, you are building it for them.
matmann2001 7y ago
> I'm not actually clear on what's incorrect about this logic It's this same logic that gave us The Cold War.
- setr 7y ago
  yes, and? Without an absurd premise (eg pretending war isn't an ever-present threat for any nation-state), and without requiring some Oracle or superior governing body to determine behaviors without the fog of war, what superior and general logic should have been applied that would have avoided the cold war? That this particular bit of logic leads us to the Cold War is well and fine; was the Cold War avoidable with some other reasonable mode of operation?
  - matmann2001 7y ago
    > what superior and general logic should have been applied that would have avoided the cold war? The logic that the entire population is stuck on this planet (then and now for the time being), and the resources/ideologies being fought over don't mean a thing if everyone is dead.