3 ms·
There must be a line somewhere between "pretty strong disinterest in finding reasons to distrust the machine" and "using the machine as plausible deniability fo
by 082349872349872 3y ago
There must be a line somewhere between "pretty strong disinterest in finding reasons to distrust the machine" and "using the machine as plausible deniability for doing what you hoped to do anyway"; is there a relatively simple description of this line, or is it a fractal boundary?
- roughly 3y agoYeah, I phrased that as generously as possible because I didn’t really want to kick that particular hornets’ nest, but the article does a fine job making that point.
- aebtebeten 3y agoVery charitable of you! (do we need an emoticon for charity, like we have for sarcasm? symmetry would suggest yes.) Upon further reflection, it occurs to me that these situations are exactly why the Geneva Conventions[0] require combatants to have (a) uniforms, and (b) a command structure: (a) prevents someone low from disingenuously stopping the buck by claiming "tweren't no orders; I'm acting on my own" (b) prevents someone high from arguing as Uber does: "you see, we're not a traditional army that gives orders to our fighters — we just provide a service that matches attackers and targets online, and really, anything bad that allegedly happened was only between those two parties"[1] [0] if we're not doing these anymore, just go ahead and tell me "the future is now, old man", and I'll take my mutterings to the pétanque piste. [1] > "Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down? That's not my department," says Wernher von Braun —TAL
- shermantanktop 3y agoTinder for combat: swipe to kill.