3 ms·

Military power and attacks on private individuals are different things. It's perfectly consistent to be against attacks on private individuals while being in fa

Military power and attacks on private individuals are different things. It's perfectly consistent to be against attacks on private individuals while being in favor of building military weapons.

luqtas 6mo ago
[flagged]
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
- seizethecheese 6mo ago
  Might consider reading https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - luqtas 6mo ago
    oh yes, sure! defending a guy who invest in war technology is perfectly fine under the guidelines /s
deaux 6mo ago
The bombed schoolgirls were "private individuals" in any reasonable meaning of "private individual".
- seizethecheese 6mo ago
  Maybe I shouldn’t take the bait here… Yes, military power is evil, but it’s a necessary evil. A society that decides to stop making weapons is going to be subjugated by one that continues to make them. Full stop.
  - deaux 6mo ago
    Nothing about the US Department of War's actions over the last 2 years, whose contracts Sam eagerly pursued to weaponize AI, has had to do with "preventing being subjugated". What they did do was bomb 150 or so private individual school girls. You're saying the above is bait, when your own comment is nothing but it.
    - seizethecheese 6mo ago
      Pasting the same reply as you sibling comment: My comment here is about the ethics of military weapons vs assassinations of private individuals. I have no idea what you’re talking about.
      - deaux 6mo ago
        Then your comment is completely irrelevant to the conversation as a reply to > Sam eagerly pursued DoD contracts to weaponize AI. And then lobbied for legislation to ensure OpenAI cannot be held accountable if people are killed due to their systems.". Your comment can't both A. be relevant as a reply to the above B. yet have "no idea what I'm talking about", as if it is not relevant. Either both of us are saying something relevant, or neither of us are. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
        seizethecheese 6mo ago
        Look at the parent of the comment you are quoting.
    - hax0ron3 6mo ago
      >Nothing about the US Department of War's actions over the last 2 years Questionable and violent US foreign policy is much much older than the current Trump administration.
  - zarzavat 6mo ago
    The US Department of Peace has also been outright murdering civilians aboard vessels in international waters, including double tap strikes intended to murder the wounded. It's not the bait on HN that you need to be worried about but the propaganda from your own government.

Military power and attacks on private individuals are different things. It's perfectly consistent to be against attacks on private individuals while being in favor of building military weapons.

luqtas 6mo ago

[flagged]

deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
seizethecheese 6mo ago
Might consider reading https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- luqtas 6mo ago
  oh yes, sure! defending a guy who invest in war technology is perfectly fine under the guidelines /s

deaux 6mo ago

The bombed schoolgirls were "private individuals" in any reasonable meaning of "private individual".

seizethecheese 6mo ago
Maybe I shouldn’t take the bait here… Yes, military power is evil, but it’s a necessary evil. A society that decides to stop making weapons is going to be subjugated by one that continues to make them. Full stop.
- deaux 6mo ago
  Nothing about the US Department of War's actions over the last 2 years, whose contracts Sam eagerly pursued to weaponize AI, has had to do with "preventing being subjugated". What they did do was bomb 150 or so private individual school girls. You're saying the above is bait, when your own comment is nothing but it.
  - seizethecheese 6mo ago
    Pasting the same reply as you sibling comment: My comment here is about the ethics of military weapons vs assassinations of private individuals. I have no idea what you’re talking about.
    - deaux 6mo ago
      Then your comment is completely irrelevant to the conversation as a reply to > Sam eagerly pursued DoD contracts to weaponize AI. And then lobbied for legislation to ensure OpenAI cannot be held accountable if people are killed due to their systems.". Your comment can't both A. be relevant as a reply to the above B. yet have "no idea what I'm talking about", as if it is not relevant. Either both of us are saying something relevant, or neither of us are. You can't have your cake and eat it too.
      - seizethecheese 6mo ago
        Look at the parent of the comment you are quoting.
  - hax0ron3 6mo ago
    >Nothing about the US Department of War's actions over the last 2 years Questionable and violent US foreign policy is much much older than the current Trump administration.
- zarzavat 6mo ago
  The US Department of Peace has also been outright murdering civilians aboard vessels in international waters, including double tap strikes intended to murder the wounded. It's not the bait on HN that you need to be worried about but the propaganda from your own government.