3 ms·

I don't think that the scenario you're sketching here is far fetched at all. Code re-use and recycling inside technical companies is very common. If any code yo

by SCHiM 12y ago

I don't think that the scenario you're sketching here is far fetched at all. Code re-use and recycling inside technical companies is very common. If any code you wrote there turned out to be great/good at something you'd never know where it might end up. Perhaps in the processor of some killer robot in the future. I wonder where the code that is running inside the drones today comes from. Some one who never meant to be involved in those things must have written either the compiler, specs or actual code that these things use to do their killing, I can't imagine any company (no matter how secure they might want to be) designing a completely new processor architecture and tools and compilers and all that from scratch.

drcomputer 12y ago
I've had job offers for programming drones. I was involved with computer security for a while, and I still have a strong interest in every computational and mathematical aspect of it. I have friends that work on those things. I like those friends. I write code. I write math. We all think. We all share abstract models, different ways of thinking. It's not just code that gets turned into code. It's thought, and everything else too. I hate feeling like my thoughts can be used to hurt people. I hate feeling like the act of choosing to exist can cause harm, but looking at it that way is like saying a tapestry is no longer a tapestry when one thread is pulled from it. I still love math, and I still love computer science. I just don't want to use it the way the a lot of the world uses it, and I don't know how much thinking I have to do before I can create code that I am satisfied over being both intelligent and humane. It's absolutely ridiculous, sometimes. Sometimes I can just stare at a cursor blinking on an IDE and feel like I'm falling into a void of 'what ifs'. Other times it is like there is no difference between myself and the machine. And then I wonder whether I'm thinking enough, again, or am I letting calculation and logic get the best of me. Have I abstracted this problem too much, too far away from reality? Does anything I think matter at all? My life continues to improve, but suffering still exists, and I feel like it is almost taboo to talk about in this way. But what is the point of existing if you can't actually make real improvements?
- SCHiM 12y ago
  I'd draw the line at actually making the code, or sharing real theory with someone else. I don't think that it's fair to condemn oneself because his/her ideas could potentially end-up sparking an idea about killer drones in someone-elses mind. In the end we're all very much alike, and it doesn't take much to transfer a few missing links if you know and they don't. In the end the same laws of nature rule in all our heads, and while it seems like each and every one of us are our own compartmentalized observers, it's not until you think a good long while about the principle of locality(and most of the other fundamental laws) that you understand that it's the other way around. Thinking this way for me is peaceful. I can't believe in god or another entity but to follow this chain of thought always leads me to consider that I'm part of something greater and more important than one single life can ever hope to be. I guess these days I see humanity more as some sort of super organism . Just as I emerge from individual cells so does humanity emerge from all the humans inside of it. I just try to do my part inside the greater of humanity, and I leave it at that.
- anigbrowl 12y ago
  Have I abstracted this problem too much, too far away from reality? I'll say. You could throw it in and go work as a coal-miner, but then you'd have to worry about the coal you mined being used to smelt steel that goes on to be manufactured as bomb casings. And so on. Certainly you shouldn't work on anything that offends you conscience, but the mere fact that something can be repurposed for warfare doesn't create moral responsibility. This isn't to say that worrying about war or your personal purpose is misplaced GH Hardy opined that ballistics was 'repulsive' both because of the moral purpose and the triviality of the mathematics involved, and there are more musings on the ethics of that sub-branch of math here: http://www.augustana.ualberta.ca/~hackw/mp480/exhibit/ballisticsMP480.pdf http://www.augustana.ualberta.ca/~hackw/mp480/exhibit/ballis... But as long as you're knowingly working on some sort of combat system, it's folly to beat yourself up over the limitations of foreseeability and the vague possibility that something you craft might turn out to have military utility which you din't intend at the time you conceived it. Instead, look for ways to provide utility in other areas.
  - drcomputer 12y ago
retrogradeorbit 12y ago
> I wonder where the code that is running inside the drones today comes from. I interviewed a candidate for a job once who wrote code for military drones. He didn't think it was bad that they were used to kill innocent people. In fact, he thought it was awesome. There are a lot of coders who have a low moral bar and will code anything for money. These are the people who write this kind of software.
- drcomputer 12y ago
  They must have a very warped perspective of people.

by SCHiM 12y ago

drcomputer 12y ago

I've had job offers for programming drones. I was involved with computer security for a while, and I still have a strong interest in every computational and mathematical aspect of it. I have friends that work on those things. I like those friends. I write code. I write math. We all think. We all share abstract models, different ways of thinking. It's not just code that gets turned into code. It's thought, and everything else too. I hate feeling like my thoughts can be used to hurt people. I hate feeling like the act of choosing to exist can cause harm, but looking at it that way is like saying a tapestry is no longer a tapestry when one thread is pulled from it. I still love math, and I still love computer science. I just don't want to use it the way the a lot of the world uses it, and I don't know how much thinking I have to do before I can create code that I am satisfied over being both intelligent and humane. It's absolutely ridiculous, sometimes. Sometimes I can just stare at a cursor blinking on an IDE and feel like I'm falling into a void of 'what ifs'. Other times it is like there is no difference between myself and the machine. And then I wonder whether I'm thinking enough, again, or am I letting calculation and logic get the best of me. Have I abstracted this problem too much, too far away from reality? Does anything I think matter at all? My life continues to improve, but suffering still exists, and I feel like it is almost taboo to talk about in this way. But what is the point of existing if you can't actually make real improvements?

SCHiM 12y ago
I'd draw the line at actually making the code, or sharing real theory with someone else. I don't think that it's fair to condemn oneself because his/her ideas could potentially end-up sparking an idea about killer drones in someone-elses mind. In the end we're all very much alike, and it doesn't take much to transfer a few missing links if you know and they don't. In the end the same laws of nature rule in all our heads, and while it seems like each and every one of us are our own compartmentalized observers, it's not until you think a good long while about the principle of locality(and most of the other fundamental laws) that you understand that it's the other way around. Thinking this way for me is peaceful. I can't believe in god or another entity but to follow this chain of thought always leads me to consider that I'm part of something greater and more important than one single life can ever hope to be. I guess these days I see humanity more as some sort of super organism . Just as I emerge from individual cells so does humanity emerge from all the humans inside of it. I just try to do my part inside the greater of humanity, and I leave it at that.
anigbrowl 12y ago
Have I abstracted this problem too much, too far away from reality? I'll say. You could throw it in and go work as a coal-miner, but then you'd have to worry about the coal you mined being used to smelt steel that goes on to be manufactured as bomb casings. And so on. Certainly you shouldn't work on anything that offends you conscience, but the mere fact that something can be repurposed for warfare doesn't create moral responsibility. This isn't to say that worrying about war or your personal purpose is misplaced GH Hardy opined that ballistics was 'repulsive' both because of the moral purpose and the triviality of the mathematics involved, and there are more musings on the ethics of that sub-branch of math here: http://www.augustana.ualberta.ca/~hackw/mp480/exhibit/ballisticsMP480.pdf http://www.augustana.ualberta.ca/~hackw/mp480/exhibit/ballis... But as long as you're knowingly working on some sort of combat system, it's folly to beat yourself up over the limitations of foreseeability and the vague possibility that something you craft might turn out to have military utility which you din't intend at the time you conceived it. Instead, look for ways to provide utility in other areas.
- drcomputer 12y ago

retrogradeorbit 12y ago

> I wonder where the code that is running inside the drones today comes from. I interviewed a candidate for a job once who wrote code for military drones. He didn't think it was bad that they were used to kill innocent people. In fact, he thought it was awesome. There are a lot of coders who have a low moral bar and will code anything for money. These are the people who write this kind of software.

drcomputer 12y ago
They must have a very warped perspective of people.