4 ms·

> People around the world build machines that melt skin off of children in Middle East There is a problem with that statement and I will try to highlight it by

> People around the world build machines that melt skin off of children in Middle East There is a problem with that statement and I will try to highlight it by creating a couple more of the same: - There are people working to build software to allow people to share child porn without getting caught (about Moxie and anyone working to bring e2e-encryption to the masses) - there were people working in factories that created hammers that were used to crush peoples skulls in Cambodia See where I am going?

izacus 6y ago
Look, I understand your point. But this bizarre handwringing over "how dare you work on advertising?" just feels like there's something wrong with worlds perception of the poster. There are literally millions of people that deliberately do jobs that knowingly hurt people (and are built AROUND hurting and scamming people) and asking yourself "why would anyone try to improve on an ads tracking system while keeping ads around?" just really really comes out as horribly naive and oblivious. Not to mention that there are even millions more of jobs where significantly more harm is done as a side effect that doesn't come close to showing a damn ad based on their amazon purchase.
- kerng 6y ago
  Targeted ads are powerful manipulation tools and its okay to call people out for working in these areas. You can do ads without profiling users and violating their privacy.
noir_lord 6y ago
I see where you are going and OP's overly emotive language damaged the credibility of his point. However not all technology/engineering is neutral even compared to other technology. For example I made the decision years ago that there are some lines I won't cross for software development - one of them been gambling systems (even though they are quite lucrative) - (Note: I'm not saying they should be banned (that is not for me to say)) because morally I can't see an acceptable use that outweighs the bad. Same with weapons systems (though of course one mans freedom fighter is anothers terrorist).
SturgeonsLaw 6y ago
Your examples refer to tools that are being misused, whereas weapons or tracking software is a negative for humanity precisely when they're working as intended
- skinkestek 6y ago
  Here we disagree. Weapons stopped Hitler. Weapons stopped USSR. Weapons stop US. Weapons stop todays Russia. Weapons are tools too. Mostly to scare away an attacker before they strike but sadly sometimes also to strike back. Double sadly they also come with the possibility to strike first. But in the choice of us being armed and Russia and China and the middle East being armed or everyone being armed except us I take the first option. Every time. Edit to add: modern weapons are actually about reducing the chance the skin is melting of children. It is fully possible to think that your country should have access to the best conventional weapons possibly while still voting for politicians that want us to stop weapons sales to madmen.
  - alpaca128 6y ago
    > Weapons stopped Hitler. Weapons stopped USSR. Weapons stop US. Weapons stop todays Russia. That's just a rephrasing of the same old "good guy with a gun" meme.
    - skinkestek 6y ago
      Anything wrong with that? Think: if you try to remove all guns overnight the ones you get is the ones from the good guys. If you make guns illegal only criminals will have guns. Also: the biggest crimes against humanity have typically been made by the local rulers: Hitler can be discussed, Stalin, Pol Pot and a number of others cannot.
      - Dylan16807 6y ago
        > Anything wrong with that? Good guy with a gun tends to hit a bystander, or cause dangerous escalation in situations that don't warrant it, or have their gun stolen. > If you make guns illegal only criminals will have guns. That's one way to look at the very short term. But then since "criminal" is not an immutable quality of a person, millions of people that weren't criminals that then commit a crime will have no gun. Trying to sort people into "good guys" and "bad guys" is a terrible idea in general.

izacus 6y ago

Look, I understand your point. But this bizarre handwringing over "how dare you work on advertising?" just feels like there's something wrong with worlds perception of the poster. There are literally millions of people that deliberately do jobs that knowingly hurt people (and are built AROUND hurting and scamming people) and asking yourself "why would anyone try to improve on an ads tracking system while keeping ads around?" just really really comes out as horribly naive and oblivious. Not to mention that there are even millions more of jobs where significantly more harm is done as a side effect that doesn't come close to showing a damn ad based on their amazon purchase.

kerng 6y ago
Targeted ads are powerful manipulation tools and its okay to call people out for working in these areas. You can do ads without profiling users and violating their privacy.

noir_lord 6y ago

I see where you are going and OP's overly emotive language damaged the credibility of his point. However not all technology/engineering is neutral even compared to other technology. For example I made the decision years ago that there are some lines I won't cross for software development - one of them been gambling systems (even though they are quite lucrative) - (Note: I'm not saying they should be banned (that is not for me to say)) because morally I can't see an acceptable use that outweighs the bad. Same with weapons systems (though of course one mans freedom fighter is anothers terrorist).

SturgeonsLaw 6y ago

Your examples refer to tools that are being misused, whereas weapons or tracking software is a negative for humanity precisely when they're working as intended

skinkestek 6y ago
Here we disagree. Weapons stopped Hitler. Weapons stopped USSR. Weapons stop US. Weapons stop todays Russia. Weapons are tools too. Mostly to scare away an attacker before they strike but sadly sometimes also to strike back. Double sadly they also come with the possibility to strike first. But in the choice of us being armed and Russia and China and the middle East being armed or everyone being armed except us I take the first option. Every time. Edit to add: modern weapons are actually about reducing the chance the skin is melting of children. It is fully possible to think that your country should have access to the best conventional weapons possibly while still voting for politicians that want us to stop weapons sales to madmen.
- alpaca128 6y ago
  > Weapons stopped Hitler. Weapons stopped USSR. Weapons stop US. Weapons stop todays Russia. That's just a rephrasing of the same old "good guy with a gun" meme.
  - skinkestek 6y ago
    Anything wrong with that? Think: if you try to remove all guns overnight the ones you get is the ones from the good guys. If you make guns illegal only criminals will have guns. Also: the biggest crimes against humanity have typically been made by the local rulers: Hitler can be discussed, Stalin, Pol Pot and a number of others cannot.
    - Dylan16807 6y ago
      > Anything wrong with that? Good guy with a gun tends to hit a bystander, or cause dangerous escalation in situations that don't warrant it, or have their gun stolen. > If you make guns illegal only criminals will have guns. That's one way to look at the very short term. But then since "criminal" is not an immutable quality of a person, millions of people that weren't criminals that then commit a crime will have no gun. Trying to sort people into "good guys" and "bad guys" is a terrible idea in general.