3 ms·

> Didn’t we just go through several weeks of hearing about OpenAI allowing its tech to be used for conducting warfare? Unfortunately warfare is a thing. Why wo

by bko 6mo ago

> Didn’t we just go through several weeks of hearing about OpenAI allowing its tech to be used for conducting warfare? Unfortunately warfare is a thing. Why wouldn't you want the best technology used for your country when conducting warfare? Or do you just believe warfare would cease to exist if a country gave up any means of defense or offense?

pocksuppet 6mo ago
You're allowed to authorize your technology to be used to kill people, but if you do so, you shouldn't be surprised when those people also try to kill you. America and Americans somehow keep forgetting that actions have consequences and the government can't always override the consequences.
- bko 6mo ago
  "Authorize" technology to kill you? Are cars authorized to run people over? Are painkillers "authorized" to get people to overdose? Are computer chips "authorized" to be put into bombers? What are you even talking about?
  - pixel_popping 6mo ago
    That's what's happening when people want to blame specific persons for world issues instead of the collective.
  - AlexeyBelov 6mo ago
    > Are painkillers "authorized" to get people to overdose? Are you saying the Sacklers did nothing wrong?
  - pocksuppet 6mo ago
    The government asked Sam Altman "may we use this to kill people?" and Sam Altman said "yes if you pay us lots of money". What's hard to understand?
xg15 6mo ago
Can we at least drop the sports games terminology ("defense", "offense") and acknowledge we're talking about mass killing of people here?
- loeg 6mo ago
  These words originated with war and were adopted by sports.
MiguelX413 6mo ago
I wouldn't want my country to use the best technology when conducting warfare because my country only conducts offensive warfare resulting in millions of innocent deaths in the Middle East, having a massive military budget that dwarfs most others combined whilst hardly ever being directly threatened.

by bko 6mo ago

pocksuppet 6mo ago

You're allowed to authorize your technology to be used to kill people, but if you do so, you shouldn't be surprised when those people also try to kill you. America and Americans somehow keep forgetting that actions have consequences and the government can't always override the consequences.

bko 6mo ago
"Authorize" technology to kill you? Are cars authorized to run people over? Are painkillers "authorized" to get people to overdose? Are computer chips "authorized" to be put into bombers? What are you even talking about?
- pixel_popping 6mo ago
  That's what's happening when people want to blame specific persons for world issues instead of the collective.
- AlexeyBelov 6mo ago
  > Are painkillers "authorized" to get people to overdose? Are you saying the Sacklers did nothing wrong?
- pocksuppet 6mo ago
  The government asked Sam Altman "may we use this to kill people?" and Sam Altman said "yes if you pay us lots of money". What's hard to understand?

xg15 6mo ago

Can we at least drop the sports games terminology ("defense", "offense") and acknowledge we're talking about mass killing of people here?

loeg 6mo ago
These words originated with war and were adopted by sports.

MiguelX413 6mo ago

I wouldn't want my country to use the best technology when conducting warfare because my country only conducts offensive warfare resulting in millions of innocent deaths in the Middle East, having a massive military budget that dwarfs most others combined whilst hardly ever being directly threatened.