4 ms·

You didn’t know Boston Dynamics was involved in weaponised platforms until 2 weeks ago? That feels like wilful ignorance at this point; DARPA was sponsoring Big

You didn’t know Boston Dynamics was involved in weaponised platforms until 2 weeks ago? That feels like wilful ignorance at this point; DARPA was sponsoring BigDog which was revealed two decades ago: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8802-robotic-pack-mule-displays-stunning-reflexes/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn8802-robotic-pack-mul...

Philpax 6mo ago
They weren't working for BD, they were working for a company using BD's platforms.
embedding-shape 6mo ago
People sometimes do things they aren't sure about, and then change their mind when the proof is right in front of them. I don't think this makes them a bad person, or wilful ignorance, maybe naive or optimistic, but you could accept employment with a company who you know had "shady" sponsors in the past hoping they'll do better in the future, then when the evidence mounts against the future actually being better, you decide to leave. Human emotions and reasoning could be internally inconsistent and conflicting, yet everything is as it should be, counter-intuitively.
horsawlarway 6mo ago
Boston Dynamics sells hardware as platforms for other companies to build on (ex: Spot/Stretch). He said he worked with their hardware, not that he worked for Boston Dynamics. Entirely possible to be working with a platform provided by Boston Dynamics at a company that is not engaged in weapons development.
deleted 6mo ago
[deleted]
pj_mukh 6mo ago
Boston Dynamics has sworn off all war machine development [1]. But as expected, others have taken their place [2]. Guilt-tripping a single non-monopoly proving useless again. [1]: https://bostondynamics.com/news/general-purpose-robots-should-not-be-weaponized/ https://bostondynamics.com/news/general-purpose-robots-shoul... [2]: https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20260323PD219/military-boston-dynamics-supply-chain-adoption-taiwan.html https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20260323PD219/military-bosto...
- Hendrikto 6mo ago
  > Boston Dynamics has sworn off all war machine development [1]. That’s just marketing bs in the same vein as “Your privacy is very important to us.”. It means nothing.
  - etiam 6mo ago
    “Your privacy is very important to us.” is technically true though. It probably does take away something from their profits, and sometimes the whole business idea, if they don't continue to rampantly violate it...
  - Froedlich 6mo ago
    Yep. Boston Dynamics has been dependent on military contracts since their founding in 1992. The "no more military weapons" statement seems to have been after they were acquired by Hyundai. Boston Dynamics' business is, basically, "mobility platforms." After all these years the basic development is all done; now they're pivoting to commercial markets. There's no real difference between a "murderbot" and, say, a police riot-control platform, a fire-fighting platform, a forestry platform, etc. They might not be explicitly developing weapon packages any more, but there are plenty of other companies who will be happy to take the money to build them onto Boston Dynamics' platforms.
    - pj_mukh 6mo ago
      "there are plenty of other companies who will be happy to take the money to build them onto Boston Dynamics' platforms." Only way to solve this is DRM. War machine (or even intimidation tool) creations on their platforms is a Terms of Use violation [1] [1]: https://bostondynamics.com/blog/an-ethical-approach-to-mobile-robots-in-our-communities/?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://bostondynamics.com/blog/an-ethical-approach-to-mobil...
barratia 6mo ago
Just to clarify: I didn't work at Boston Dynamics, I worked for a company that used their hardware (among others) as platforms for our own projects. I knew about BD's history with DARPA, of course. The issue was that my company was doing some actually really interesting non-defense work, and then decided to pivot and mount teleoperated weapons on these platforms for a new demo. That’s when I submitted my resignation :)
- robin_reala 6mo ago
  Good clarification, thanks!
jmalicki 6mo ago
DARPA sponsors lots of things that aren't specifically about weapons or killing people - medical treatment, logistics, etc. that are useful for defense/war but generally applicable. Sure, Boston Dynamics is a bit more obvious there, but merely having DARPA funding doesn't mean it's about killing people.

Philpax 6mo ago

They weren't working for BD, they were working for a company using BD's platforms.

embedding-shape 6mo ago

People sometimes do things they aren't sure about, and then change their mind when the proof is right in front of them. I don't think this makes them a bad person, or wilful ignorance, maybe naive or optimistic, but you could accept employment with a company who you know had "shady" sponsors in the past hoping they'll do better in the future, then when the evidence mounts against the future actually being better, you decide to leave. Human emotions and reasoning could be internally inconsistent and conflicting, yet everything is as it should be, counter-intuitively.

horsawlarway 6mo ago

Boston Dynamics sells hardware as platforms for other companies to build on (ex: Spot/Stretch). He said he worked with their hardware, not that he worked for Boston Dynamics. Entirely possible to be working with a platform provided by Boston Dynamics at a company that is not engaged in weapons development.

deleted 6mo ago

[deleted]

pj_mukh 6mo ago

Boston Dynamics has sworn off all war machine development [1]. But as expected, others have taken their place [2]. Guilt-tripping a single non-monopoly proving useless again. [1]: https://bostondynamics.com/news/general-purpose-robots-should-not-be-weaponized/ https://bostondynamics.com/news/general-purpose-robots-shoul... [2]: https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20260323PD219/military-boston-dynamics-supply-chain-adoption-taiwan.html https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20260323PD219/military-bosto...

Hendrikto 6mo ago
> Boston Dynamics has sworn off all war machine development [1]. That’s just marketing bs in the same vein as “Your privacy is very important to us.”. It means nothing.
- etiam 6mo ago
  “Your privacy is very important to us.” is technically true though. It probably does take away something from their profits, and sometimes the whole business idea, if they don't continue to rampantly violate it...
- Froedlich 6mo ago
  Yep. Boston Dynamics has been dependent on military contracts since their founding in 1992. The "no more military weapons" statement seems to have been after they were acquired by Hyundai. Boston Dynamics' business is, basically, "mobility platforms." After all these years the basic development is all done; now they're pivoting to commercial markets. There's no real difference between a "murderbot" and, say, a police riot-control platform, a fire-fighting platform, a forestry platform, etc. They might not be explicitly developing weapon packages any more, but there are plenty of other companies who will be happy to take the money to build them onto Boston Dynamics' platforms.
  - pj_mukh 6mo ago
    "there are plenty of other companies who will be happy to take the money to build them onto Boston Dynamics' platforms." Only way to solve this is DRM. War machine (or even intimidation tool) creations on their platforms is a Terms of Use violation [1] [1]: https://bostondynamics.com/blog/an-ethical-approach-to-mobile-robots-in-our-communities/?utm_source=chatgpt.com https://bostondynamics.com/blog/an-ethical-approach-to-mobil...

barratia 6mo ago

Just to clarify: I didn't work at Boston Dynamics, I worked for a company that used their hardware (among others) as platforms for our own projects. I knew about BD's history with DARPA, of course. The issue was that my company was doing some actually really interesting non-defense work, and then decided to pivot and mount teleoperated weapons on these platforms for a new demo. That’s when I submitted my resignation :)

robin_reala 6mo ago
Good clarification, thanks!

jmalicki 6mo ago

DARPA sponsors lots of things that aren't specifically about weapons or killing people - medical treatment, logistics, etc. that are useful for defense/war but generally applicable. Sure, Boston Dynamics is a bit more obvious there, but merely having DARPA funding doesn't mean it's about killing people.