4 ms·

I was offered a nice contracting job at a USAF base. All I had to do was run a single large Oracle server (Sun Enterprise 10000). I asked "what does the syste

I was offered a nice contracting job at a USAF base. All I had to do was run a single large Oracle server (Sun Enterprise 10000). I asked "what does the system do?" The recruiter told me the database handled the parts ordering system for foreign countries that need to order replacement parts for F-15 fighters that the US ships to them. I turned down the position for ethical reasons. Somehow, I'm not comfortable knowing that I helped facilitate the export of US weapons systems to foreign countries that history has shown us are likely to use them to bomb their own people, or innocent people in their neighboring countries. The fact that most of these F-15s end up in middle eastern countries seems to be standard operating procedure for the US government. Then, later, when the next dictator they propped up starts bombing innocent civilians, the politicians will act outraged "who knew that by supplying weapons systems to a dictator he would ever turn them on innocent people?" Sorry, but I don't want the blood of innocents on my hands. Working at the NSA might not directly be as damaging, but you better believe that people will die indirectly because of something you helped work on. Do you want that guilt on your conscience?

lincolnq 14y ago
I don't understand the moral intuition here: why is working on that Oracle server morally wrong, but not paying taxes to the country which bombs those innocent civilians?
- drivingmenuts 14y ago
  It's a realistic choice. One can usually choose not to work in a military-related occupation and probably not face any major repercussions. However, if one chooses not to pay taxes, one may soon find oneself without the ability to earn an income of any sort, for starters. Everyone has limits to what they feel they can do in protest.
- cbryan 14y ago
  I've been in a similar situation, and I think it's about risk. It's relatively easy to decline a job, you're not going to jail for turning down a gig. Not paying taxes will get you some serious jail time though. So morally, yeah, both actions are enabling the same results, but one is easier to commit to.
  - mindslight 14y ago
    Also, not paying taxes has less prospect of leading by example. The sheer majority will attack you for not paying your "fair" share, as they internalize their rulers' plans as their own to feel a sense of purpose.
    - drivingmenuts 14y ago
      There's some justification for that, though. If you don't pay your portion, then that's less funding for the things that are common good, as well as common bad. I don't particularly think it's all that great that childless homeowners pay school taxes on their property, but I accept the reasoning for it.
- dclowd9901 14y ago
  That's a false dichotomy as not all of the taxes you pay go toward national defense. He sees a closer connection to actively (and willingly) working on systems that could be used to oppress people in other places than the 50-someodd percent of his Federal taxes finding their way into National Defense spending (which, by all accounts, he probably wouldn't pay if he had the choice). Even if that wasn't the case, the argument can simply be "why contribute even more to the military war machine than I already have to," which isn't at all an unjust argument. This argument also presumes there's no barrier to simply changing residency of country, when in fact, it can be very difficult to get a visa, let alone a job, for a militarily neutral country like Switzerland.
- illumin8 14y ago
  I can't choose not to pay taxes. I can choose not to spend 8 hours a day assisting in the delivery of weapons systems.
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
cleaver 14y ago
Sure bombing innocent civilians is bad, but for me it would be enough to simply say I won't run a large Oracle server for ethical reasons.
jedberg 14y ago
What about all the lives your work might save? What if you figure out how to crack the encryption of a network of evil doers so that the next bombing of civilians is prevented?
- devb 14y ago
  Have the foreign operations of the US government in the last ten years saved or ended a larger number of lives?
  - jedberg 14y ago
    How could we possibly know, given that most of the operations are I assume clandestine and we'll never hear about them, positive or negative? For some anecdotal evidence, I worked with a guy who was a colonel in the Army reserve. He was called up a few years ago to head up a base in Africa. His mission? To bring food and water to the citizens there. The army was doing this because they had to fight off the warlords who would try and steal the aid that was being provided. So sure, you hear about a whole bunch of things the government is doing that is evil, and I'll be the first to stand with you and agree, but there is a lot of good being done too. Imagine if the NSA had intercepted the plans for 9/11 and been allowed to stop it. 3000+ lives would have been saved, and you would have never ever heard about it.
    - briandear 14y ago
      And that has happened on numerous occasions. The number of Hezbollah fronts that have been stopped in just Houston alone saved a large number of lives by disrupting financing mechanisms that facilitate illicit materiél aquisitions. But the tin foil hat crowd would prefer to fixate on missteps. There was plenty of bad stuff the US (and Brits) did in WWII, but cracking Enigma codes saved potentially millions of lives. I don't know who would argue that working on the Enigma project was harming the worl, except maybe Germans at the time. The intel world is very ambiguous. It a person can't deal with ambiguity, then they'd be better off staying out of the intel community.
dmishe 14y ago
So, working on any open-source component that military will use accounts to killing?

lincolnq 14y ago

I don't understand the moral intuition here: why is working on that Oracle server morally wrong, but not paying taxes to the country which bombs those innocent civilians?

drivingmenuts 14y ago
It's a realistic choice. One can usually choose not to work in a military-related occupation and probably not face any major repercussions. However, if one chooses not to pay taxes, one may soon find oneself without the ability to earn an income of any sort, for starters. Everyone has limits to what they feel they can do in protest.
cbryan 14y ago
I've been in a similar situation, and I think it's about risk. It's relatively easy to decline a job, you're not going to jail for turning down a gig. Not paying taxes will get you some serious jail time though. So morally, yeah, both actions are enabling the same results, but one is easier to commit to.
- mindslight 14y ago
  Also, not paying taxes has less prospect of leading by example. The sheer majority will attack you for not paying your "fair" share, as they internalize their rulers' plans as their own to feel a sense of purpose.
  - drivingmenuts 14y ago
    There's some justification for that, though. If you don't pay your portion, then that's less funding for the things that are common good, as well as common bad. I don't particularly think it's all that great that childless homeowners pay school taxes on their property, but I accept the reasoning for it.
dclowd9901 14y ago
That's a false dichotomy as not all of the taxes you pay go toward national defense. He sees a closer connection to actively (and willingly) working on systems that could be used to oppress people in other places than the 50-someodd percent of his Federal taxes finding their way into National Defense spending (which, by all accounts, he probably wouldn't pay if he had the choice). Even if that wasn't the case, the argument can simply be "why contribute even more to the military war machine than I already have to," which isn't at all an unjust argument. This argument also presumes there's no barrier to simply changing residency of country, when in fact, it can be very difficult to get a visa, let alone a job, for a militarily neutral country like Switzerland.
illumin8 14y ago
I can't choose not to pay taxes. I can choose not to spend 8 hours a day assisting in the delivery of weapons systems.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

cleaver 14y ago

Sure bombing innocent civilians is bad, but for me it would be enough to simply say I won't run a large Oracle server for ethical reasons.

jedberg 14y ago

What about all the lives your work might save? What if you figure out how to crack the encryption of a network of evil doers so that the next bombing of civilians is prevented?

devb 14y ago
Have the foreign operations of the US government in the last ten years saved or ended a larger number of lives?
- jedberg 14y ago
  How could we possibly know, given that most of the operations are I assume clandestine and we'll never hear about them, positive or negative? For some anecdotal evidence, I worked with a guy who was a colonel in the Army reserve. He was called up a few years ago to head up a base in Africa. His mission? To bring food and water to the citizens there. The army was doing this because they had to fight off the warlords who would try and steal the aid that was being provided. So sure, you hear about a whole bunch of things the government is doing that is evil, and I'll be the first to stand with you and agree, but there is a lot of good being done too. Imagine if the NSA had intercepted the plans for 9/11 and been allowed to stop it. 3000+ lives would have been saved, and you would have never ever heard about it.
  - briandear 14y ago
    And that has happened on numerous occasions. The number of Hezbollah fronts that have been stopped in just Houston alone saved a large number of lives by disrupting financing mechanisms that facilitate illicit materiél aquisitions. But the tin foil hat crowd would prefer to fixate on missteps. There was plenty of bad stuff the US (and Brits) did in WWII, but cracking Enigma codes saved potentially millions of lives. I don't know who would argue that working on the Enigma project was harming the worl, except maybe Germans at the time. The intel world is very ambiguous. It a person can't deal with ambiguity, then they'd be better off staying out of the intel community.

dmishe 14y ago

So, working on any open-source component that military will use accounts to killing?