5 ms·

To the people who complain about the ethics of defence tech: I hear you, but we live in an increasingly hostile world. Si vis pacem, para bellum. If you want

To the people who complain about the ethics of defence tech: I hear you, but we live in an increasingly hostile world. Si vis pacem, para bellum. If you want peace you must prepare for war.

stemlord 2y ago
As if silicon valley has been a bastion of ethical business prior
- throwpoaster 2y ago
  When we’re talking about weapons I think we’re in a different ethical category.
  - krapp 2y ago
    Silicon Valley was building chips and systems for the Department of Defense long before the internet and startups were a gleam in anyone's eye. The US is an oligarchy and the success permitted any business in the US is a function of its subservience and utility to the military industrial complex. Look up the early history of Google and Facebook, you'll find tons of links to three letter agencies. Every FAANG (or whatever the acronym du jour is now) or equivalent startup is run by spooks and sociopaths with blood on their hands. That's just how America works.
    - ratlrrr 2y ago
      > spooks and sociopaths with blood on their hands. That's just how America works. Even in certain unnamed European countries, they proliferate more freely than you'd think, staying unnoticed as long as they’re deniably placating their wrongdoings within the civilian sector. Certain ones are known to become increasingly bold as they encroach on organized crime and PMC breeding grounds, both in close proximity, as of recently. It happens in seemingly ordinary situations, and you'd be surprised at how insidious certain individuals can become.
tourmalinetaco 2y ago
If you believe we must prepare for war, then what are your feelings on gun ownership?
- throwpoaster 2y ago
  It’s great. I’m not an American and live in a country where gun ownership is highly regulated.
FredPret 2y ago
> Si vis pacem, para bellum. We used to have a major, major war every generation. Improved weaponry (and nukes) have been a huge force for peace since 1945. There have been only proxy wars since then and battle deaths per 100k people dropped off a cliff.
- scubadude 2y ago
  The United Nations deserves credit for this as much as anything.
  - onepointsixC 2y ago
    Which conflict has the UN prevented?
    - scubadude 2y ago
      Who's to say? It was setup to get nations talking and prevent another world war. We haven't had a world war since.
      - throwpoaster 2y ago
        This statement has a correlation versus causation problem.
      - onepointsixC 2y ago
        We haven’t had a world war since because nuclear weapons had deterred it. The UN hasn’t prevented anything.
- TiredOfLife 2y ago
  Russia invading Ukraine is a proxy war?
  - throwpoaster 2y ago
    Yes, clearly.
soared 2y ago
This is incorrect - we live in an increasingly peaceful world.
- wslh 2y ago
  We could live in a peaceful world because there are circles of protection around the territory, people, organizations, etc. For example, you can express all the democracy you want in the US but you have F35s, aircraft carriers, etc that supports the system. Like it or not.
- throwpoaster 2y ago
  What data are you relying on to make this claim?
sudosysgen 2y ago
We live in the most peaceful world ever, and within the last 30 years the US, which is where Ares and Y Combinator is located, has been the most belligerent state by a country mile. Si vis pacem, par bellum does not really apply to the United States. The US is bellum paratum enough for war to be it's own election, and it has elected for war enough to know that making more weapons for the US won't being any peace.
- atlasunshrugged 2y ago
  I think there's a distinction between being involved in conflicts and being belligerent. Post fall of the Soviet Union the U.S. took on the role of world police, and that included getting involved in lots of conflicts that probably normally would have been fought by regional powers (ex. Desert Storm/Kuwait, Bosnia). The standout here of course is Iraq/Afghanistan, but in terms of globally belligerent behavior China seems to be the clear winner here, no (or maybe N. Korea but seems more regional)? Trying to redraw boundaries, creating artificial islands, aggressive maneuvers endangering Philippine and Japanese sailors, everything regarding Taiwan, aggressive trade tactics... the list goes on.
  - sudosysgen 2y ago
    This distinction is far too subjective and biased. First of all, the vast majority of conflicts the US was involved in would not have been fought by regional powers, or not with that intensity, see Libya, various conflicts in South America, etc... Second, when the US was in China's position, it did everything China does right now, with even more violence. The US annexed, failed to annex or dominate every one of it's neighbors until it relented. There has been no fundamental change in policy since then.
  - einpoklum 2y ago
    > took on the role of world police, There's a neighborhood in my city where this family has taken on the role of community police. Strangely enough, most people outside that family believe they have taken on the role of the dominant criminal gang; I wonder why that is. When accused of violence, they mention the belligerence of some of their (real and imaginary) rivals.
tmnvix 2y ago
Yes, it's unlikely that a defence industry won't ever seem 'necessary'. However, if we are going to take an ethical perspective, it seems like a particularly inopportune time to be joining the industry given that the intended customer (the US government) has refused to abide by its own laws with regard to selling weapons to regimes that fail to meet the necessary standards.
- throwpoaster 2y ago
  I’m curious if you have an example of those regimes and standards?
  - defrost 2y ago
    There's a list, but for a single current example: Women and children in Yeman would be an example of misuse of US weapons. *War Atrocities in Yemen Linked to US Weapons Columbia Law School researchers have unveiled a disturbing connection between American arms and civilian deaths. a joint investigation by the Security Force Monitor [..] recently concluded that a “substantial portion” of airstrikes that have killed civilians in Yemen have been carried out by jets developed, sold, and maintained by US companies and flown by US-trained pilots. https://magazine.columbia.edu/article/war-atrocities-yemen-linked-us-weapons https://magazine.columbia.edu/article/war-atrocities-yemen-l... THe UK is also at fault here, it's not just the US that supply advanced weapon systems with casual disregard for end use.
    - throwpoaster 2y ago
      It’s very unfortunate the Houthis use the civilian populace as human shields. America should stop them.
zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
The United States keeps calling it defense but when is it ever used defensively?
- throwpoaster 2y ago
  In Ukraine. One example…
  - zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
    There aren't many examples of defense in this list https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_U...

To the people who complain about the ethics of defence tech: I hear you, but we live in an increasingly hostile world. Si vis pacem, para bellum. If you want peace you must prepare for war.

stemlord 2y ago

As if silicon valley has been a bastion of ethical business prior

throwpoaster 2y ago
When we’re talking about weapons I think we’re in a different ethical category.
- krapp 2y ago
  Silicon Valley was building chips and systems for the Department of Defense long before the internet and startups were a gleam in anyone's eye. The US is an oligarchy and the success permitted any business in the US is a function of its subservience and utility to the military industrial complex. Look up the early history of Google and Facebook, you'll find tons of links to three letter agencies. Every FAANG (or whatever the acronym du jour is now) or equivalent startup is run by spooks and sociopaths with blood on their hands. That's just how America works.
  - ratlrrr 2y ago
    > spooks and sociopaths with blood on their hands. That's just how America works. Even in certain unnamed European countries, they proliferate more freely than you'd think, staying unnoticed as long as they’re deniably placating their wrongdoings within the civilian sector. Certain ones are known to become increasingly bold as they encroach on organized crime and PMC breeding grounds, both in close proximity, as of recently. It happens in seemingly ordinary situations, and you'd be surprised at how insidious certain individuals can become.

tourmalinetaco 2y ago

If you believe we must prepare for war, then what are your feelings on gun ownership?

throwpoaster 2y ago
It’s great. I’m not an American and live in a country where gun ownership is highly regulated.

FredPret 2y ago

> Si vis pacem, para bellum. We used to have a major, major war every generation. Improved weaponry (and nukes) have been a huge force for peace since 1945. There have been only proxy wars since then and battle deaths per 100k people dropped off a cliff.

scubadude 2y ago
The United Nations deserves credit for this as much as anything.
- onepointsixC 2y ago
  Which conflict has the UN prevented?
  - scubadude 2y ago
    Who's to say? It was setup to get nations talking and prevent another world war. We haven't had a world war since.
    - throwpoaster 2y ago
      This statement has a correlation versus causation problem.
    - onepointsixC 2y ago
      We haven’t had a world war since because nuclear weapons had deterred it. The UN hasn’t prevented anything.
TiredOfLife 2y ago
Russia invading Ukraine is a proxy war?
- throwpoaster 2y ago
  Yes, clearly.

soared 2y ago

This is incorrect - we live in an increasingly peaceful world.

wslh 2y ago
We could live in a peaceful world because there are circles of protection around the territory, people, organizations, etc. For example, you can express all the democracy you want in the US but you have F35s, aircraft carriers, etc that supports the system. Like it or not.
throwpoaster 2y ago
What data are you relying on to make this claim?

sudosysgen 2y ago

We live in the most peaceful world ever, and within the last 30 years the US, which is where Ares and Y Combinator is located, has been the most belligerent state by a country mile. Si vis pacem, par bellum does not really apply to the United States. The US is bellum paratum enough for war to be it's own election, and it has elected for war enough to know that making more weapons for the US won't being any peace.

atlasunshrugged 2y ago
I think there's a distinction between being involved in conflicts and being belligerent. Post fall of the Soviet Union the U.S. took on the role of world police, and that included getting involved in lots of conflicts that probably normally would have been fought by regional powers (ex. Desert Storm/Kuwait, Bosnia). The standout here of course is Iraq/Afghanistan, but in terms of globally belligerent behavior China seems to be the clear winner here, no (or maybe N. Korea but seems more regional)? Trying to redraw boundaries, creating artificial islands, aggressive maneuvers endangering Philippine and Japanese sailors, everything regarding Taiwan, aggressive trade tactics... the list goes on.
- sudosysgen 2y ago
  This distinction is far too subjective and biased. First of all, the vast majority of conflicts the US was involved in would not have been fought by regional powers, or not with that intensity, see Libya, various conflicts in South America, etc... Second, when the US was in China's position, it did everything China does right now, with even more violence. The US annexed, failed to annex or dominate every one of it's neighbors until it relented. There has been no fundamental change in policy since then.
- einpoklum 2y ago
  > took on the role of world police, There's a neighborhood in my city where this family has taken on the role of community police. Strangely enough, most people outside that family believe they have taken on the role of the dominant criminal gang; I wonder why that is. When accused of violence, they mention the belligerence of some of their (real and imaginary) rivals.

tmnvix 2y ago

Yes, it's unlikely that a defence industry won't ever seem 'necessary'. However, if we are going to take an ethical perspective, it seems like a particularly inopportune time to be joining the industry given that the intended customer (the US government) has refused to abide by its own laws with regard to selling weapons to regimes that fail to meet the necessary standards.

throwpoaster 2y ago
I’m curious if you have an example of those regimes and standards?
- defrost 2y ago
  There's a list, but for a single current example: Women and children in Yeman would be an example of misuse of US weapons. *War Atrocities in Yemen Linked to US Weapons Columbia Law School researchers have unveiled a disturbing connection between American arms and civilian deaths. a joint investigation by the Security Force Monitor [..] recently concluded that a “substantial portion” of airstrikes that have killed civilians in Yemen have been carried out by jets developed, sold, and maintained by US companies and flown by US-trained pilots. https://magazine.columbia.edu/article/war-atrocities-yemen-linked-us-weapons https://magazine.columbia.edu/article/war-atrocities-yemen-l... THe UK is also at fault here, it's not just the US that supply advanced weapon systems with casual disregard for end use.
  - throwpoaster 2y ago
    It’s very unfortunate the Houthis use the civilian populace as human shields. America should stop them.

zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago

The United States keeps calling it defense but when is it ever used defensively?

throwpoaster 2y ago
In Ukraine. One example…
- zoklet-enjoyer 2y ago
  There aren't many examples of defense in this list https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_U...