There is a conceptual difference between releasing a weapon (even if for research/defensive purposes) and releasing tools which could later be adapted negativel

There is a conceptual difference between releasing a weapon (even if for research/defensive purposes) and releasing tools which could later be adapted negatively. That's not to say that weapons should never be created/released, but that there is an extra onus on the creators to at least consider the harm they are enabling and possible mitigations. The Apache Foundation - great example, thank you - despite not creating weapons, has clearly put thought into how their work interacts with wider society and how to ensure positive outcomes as far as possible [1]. People absolutely don't have to agree on moral issues, but it is irresponsible not to have considered them. [1] https://apache.org/theapacheway/index.html https://apache.org/theapacheway/index.html