3 ms·
> and obviously nobody could have paid people upfront for the wild experimentation that was necessary. I don't think this is the "ends justify the means" argum
by talldayo 2y ago
> and obviously nobody could have paid people upfront for the wild experimentation that was necessary.
I don't think this is the "ends justify the means" argument you think it is.
- 6gvONxR4sf7o 2y agoNot just that. It's "the ends might justify the means if this path turns out to be the right one." I remember reading the same thing each time a self driving car company killed someone. "We need this hacky dangerous way of development to save lives sooner" and then the company ends up shuttered and there aren't any ends justifying means. Which means it's bs, regardless of how you feel about 'ends justify the means' as a valid argument.