4 ms·
It was, on a technical level, the most interesting work I’ve ever done. What people say about the US government being ahead of the commercially available techno
by cushychicken 3mo ago
It was, on a technical level, the most interesting work I’ve ever done. What people say about the US government being ahead of the commercially available technology curve is certainly true.
The work I did absolutely had positive impact on the world.
People rush to criticize and write off working in the defense sector, but it can be a very rewarding place to work. There are absolutely problems in that sector - bad management and regulatory capture being primary among them. (Ultimately, those are why I left.)
It’s hard to judge accurately from the outside. That’s the nature of classified work: by definition, you can’t know what you’re getting yourself into until you’ve jumped with both feet.
- alexashka 3mo ago[flagged]
- oh_fiddlesticks 3mo agoA bit of an unconstructive, unwarranted jab, if I may say so.
- iwontberude 3mo ago[dead]
- jckahn 3mo agoIs the implication here that we should take the moral high ground and let our adversaries murder us first?
- justsomehnguy 3mo agoIt's quite strange what your adversaries become them after you travel to other side of the planet and kill, maim and destroy them.
- iso1631 3mo agoWell that would be fine if it was defence. But it's now the department of war, led by a person who has attacked two countries this year alone.
- jckahn 3mo agoI'm against the U.S.'s broken leadership as much as any sensible person. But even in normal times with sane leadership, national defense is often a matter of "kill or be killed." This is certainly an uncomfortable truth, but that's the way of the world.
- alexashka 3mo ago[flagged]
- mpyne 3mo agoUkraine is also running headlong into the reality of kill or be killed.
- ryandrake 3mo agoIn what "normal" times is a country down to the "kill or be killed" choice? It's only "kill or be killed" if you are under attack by an actual aggressor. When was the last time, say, Canada or New Zealand, felt their national defense choices were "kill or be killed"?
- culi 3mo agoI mean it's not like we know those "adversaries" ever wanted to murder us. For example, the US has a long record of assassinating labor leaders in South America to protect our Banana Republics on behalf of Chiquita. I think it's absolutely fair to bring in skepticism towards the secrets our military keeps from us
- jckahn 3mo agoDo you believe that "death to America" chants should not be taken seriously?
- culi 3mo agoI'm saying it is foolish and historically uninformed to hold a blind faith that everyone that the US labels an "adversary" is evil. Would you like to engage with the comment I left?
- jckahn 3mo agoI agree that blindly assuming that all "adversaries" of the U.S. (per labeling by the U.S. government) want to kill us. But it does seem that some indeed do. It would further seem that proportionate countermeasures would be appropriate for those cases.
- mx7zysuj4xew 3mo agoYeah To the younger generations it's just political theatre and gets laughed at as being the equivalent of boomer cringe
- fryanyway_swe 3mo ago[flagged]
- dofm 3mo agoIn short, yes. They should not be taken seriously. You should take Iranian actions on the ground seriously, and ignore that which is essentially compelled political theatre.
- alexashka 3mo ago[flagged]
- Teever 3mo agoIs Canada an adversary of America? Or Greenland? What position should Canadians or the people of Greenland take with regards to the people in the US military who are currently working to annex and invade their countries? What position should the US military take with regards to the people in those countries who are currently working to resist those efforts to annex and invade their countries their homelands? Do you consider Canadian and Icelandic civilians your adversary? If so, how did that come to be?
- jacquesm 3mo agoI think you meant to write Greenland.
- Sabinus 3mo agoShould the whole of the military quit because the American people were x enough to elect Trump?
- jacquesm 3mo agoThere is a Godwin in there somewhere.
- Teever 3mo agoI can’t speak to what the American military should do in this situation but I’m curious to hear what HN users think the people of Canada and Greenland should do in this situation. What would the American response to these kinds of actions be if the shoe was on the other foot? Given the asymmetry in power how should Canada and Greenland respond? If the American response to Iranian actions against American allies and interest in the Middle East is to spend half their missile stockpile to assassinate the leadership of Iran how should Canada respond to American threats of annexation and Greenland of invasion? What’s proportional and sensible here? https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/aug/08/greenland-iwarning-trump-linked-oil-firm-prepares-drill https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/aug/08/greenland-iwar... https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/alberta-separatism-trump-administration-9.7068999 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/alberta-separatism-trump-ad...
- halJordan 3mo ago[flagged]
- kingkawn 3mo agoMaybe everything you listed and nation state murders are all bad?
- amarcheschi 3mo agoThanks
- Demiurge 3mo ago> What people say about the US government being ahead of the commercially available technology curve is certainly true. Is that what they say?
- singingtoday 3mo agoYes, and it's true. Not in every field. For example, defense contractors have material science well beyond what is commercially available. I'm a nobody, and what I've seen is world changing. And that isn't even the half of it.
- cushychicken 3mo agoThe small slice of what I saw was some truly sci fi stuff. People tend to forget that the US government will pay out the wazoo to achieve things that are one-time successes. Consider things like Operation IVY BELLS, or Project Azorian. Now consider that same mindset applied to a long term investment. The possibilities are pretty limitless.