5 ms·

Calling for a tool manufacturer to be responsible for how a tool is used is absurd.

shadowgovt 6y ago
It's true, but it gets fuzzier when the tool is a service. If Autodesk has a cloud component, it's up to them whether they vend that component to fossil fuel prospectors or miners.
- driverdan 6y ago
  How is it fuzzier? If someone stores illegal content on Google Drive should Google be prosecuted? Of course not. And in this case we're not even talking about something that's illegal.
  - shadowgovt 6y ago
    It's not whether they should be prosecuted, it's about what their ethical / moral stance is on the topic. Some people think cloud services should be like fire or water; available to everyone agnostic of what they choose to do with it. But that's a moral stance, and one reasonable people can have disagreement over. Google employees, for example, pushed company leadership on weather they were comfortable with the notion the company would provide machine learning services to the US military for target identification purposes in drone video. Software as a service gives technology companies incredible power, and it is possible that in a world of potential existential risk to humanity, it is power they should leverage. Possible. I have no idea if it is a good idea.
- hobofan 6y ago
  Whether it's a desktop solution or a cloud component isn't really a big difference in my eyes. With both of them they will be purchasing (use-case agnostic) "customer support" as the main service. What I do think is more problematic, is when the company goes out of their way to help develop the tools specifically for questionable industries, which is exactly what they are highlighting in the linked PDF (which is still a hotlink to Autodesk servers...).
SAI_Peregrinus 6y ago
Legally they all already are. Any tool which is required for the production of nuclear weapons is regulated. Things like hammers are easily available and not tracked, but precise enough CNC machines have built-in always on GPS and cell/satellite links to report their locations. The manufacturer is responsible for ensuring the machine cannot be used outside its licensed geofenced area.
- credit_guy 6y ago
  I think you are referring to dual-use technologies [1], where the "dual" use means civilian and military. The list of technologies that are deemed "dual-use" is quite explicit and can be found in the Wassenaar Arrangement document [2]. In that document you'll find out there are plenty of paragraphs about software, for example on page 139 "software application programs designed to be hosted on general purpose computers located at Air Traffic Control centres and capable of accepting radar target data from more than four primary radars". I would be extraordinarily surprised if Autodesk were not in compliance with this rule. Similarly, as soon as a rule were passed to limit the use of a technology to ecologically damaging activities, Autodesk's Legal department would start combing through it and make sure they are in compliance, and if not, they'll see what steps to take to fall in compliance at the earliest date possible. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-use_technology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-use_technology [2]https://www.wassenaar.org/app/uploads/2019/12/WA-DOC-19-PUB-002-Public-Docs-Vol-II-2019-List-of-DU-Goods-and-Technologies-and-Munitions-List-Dec-19.pdf https://www.wassenaar.org/app/uploads/2019/12/WA-DOC-19-PUB-...

It's true, but it gets fuzzier when the tool is a service. If Autodesk has a cloud component, it's up to them whether they vend that component to fossil fuel prospectors or miners.

driverdan 6y ago
How is it fuzzier? If someone stores illegal content on Google Drive should Google be prosecuted? Of course not. And in this case we're not even talking about something that's illegal.
- shadowgovt 6y ago
  It's not whether they should be prosecuted, it's about what their ethical / moral stance is on the topic. Some people think cloud services should be like fire or water; available to everyone agnostic of what they choose to do with it. But that's a moral stance, and one reasonable people can have disagreement over. Google employees, for example, pushed company leadership on weather they were comfortable with the notion the company would provide machine learning services to the US military for target identification purposes in drone video. Software as a service gives technology companies incredible power, and it is possible that in a world of potential existential risk to humanity, it is power they should leverage. Possible. I have no idea if it is a good idea.
hobofan 6y ago
Whether it's a desktop solution or a cloud component isn't really a big difference in my eyes. With both of them they will be purchasing (use-case agnostic) "customer support" as the main service. What I do think is more problematic, is when the company goes out of their way to help develop the tools specifically for questionable industries, which is exactly what they are highlighting in the linked PDF (which is still a hotlink to Autodesk servers...).

SAI_Peregrinus 6y ago

Legally they all already are. Any tool which is required for the production of nuclear weapons is regulated. Things like hammers are easily available and not tracked, but precise enough CNC machines have built-in always on GPS and cell/satellite links to report their locations. The manufacturer is responsible for ensuring the machine cannot be used outside its licensed geofenced area.

credit_guy 6y ago
I think you are referring to dual-use technologies [1], where the "dual" use means civilian and military. The list of technologies that are deemed "dual-use" is quite explicit and can be found in the Wassenaar Arrangement document [2]. In that document you'll find out there are plenty of paragraphs about software, for example on page 139 "software application programs designed to be hosted on general purpose computers located at Air Traffic Control centres and capable of accepting radar target data from more than four primary radars". I would be extraordinarily surprised if Autodesk were not in compliance with this rule. Similarly, as soon as a rule were passed to limit the use of a technology to ecologically damaging activities, Autodesk's Legal department would start combing through it and make sure they are in compliance, and if not, they'll see what steps to take to fall in compliance at the earliest date possible. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-use_technology https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual-use_technology [2]https://www.wassenaar.org/app/uploads/2019/12/WA-DOC-19-PUB-002-Public-Docs-Vol-II-2019-List-of-DU-Goods-and-Technologies-and-Munitions-List-Dec-19.pdf https://www.wassenaar.org/app/uploads/2019/12/WA-DOC-19-PUB-...