Human-created systems (science funding in the US) are absolutely built upon human ethics and morals and subject to modification. But the concept of productivity

Human-created systems (science funding in the US) are absolutely built upon human ethics and morals and subject to modification. But the concept of productivity = f(time-invested) is indeed an amoral natural law. f(.) is not necessarily something simple like a line, maybe a sigmoid, I don't know. But the idea that time spent on a problem is, away from corner cases like 0 and 24/7, positively correlated with results and productivity - that idea is indeed amoral and not really mutable. You bring up the military, and I can draw another analogy - development of a military technology. Sure, you can decide nukes are amoral, but the more actors there are in the world, the higher the chance that someone else will develop them anyway, and will wipe the floor with you, amoral as though they may be. So do you really have a choice? Generall,y when a technological advance is possible and brings about significant advantages for the entity that develops it, it will eventually happen. It won't be good or bad, it just will be. Agonize about it or don't, develop it or let yourself be overpowered by the one who will - your moral choice entirely.