> straight out refuse working on such projects People do. Then they quit their jobs and are replaced by other smart people willing to do the work (and needing

> straight out refuse working on such projects People do. Then they quit their jobs and are replaced by other smart people willing to do the work (and needing the job). > people who do work on such systems should be held accountable in some deep way Never going to happen. The political and military leaders are the ones who choose to develop and deploy such weapons. They should be held accountable, and sometimes they are. Should we go out and prosecute all the engineers and scientists who worked on nuclear bombs that have been sitting in bunkers and silos for the past 60 years? > We have reached a developmental stage where building tools and techniques in the active goal of harming human lives has become morally unacceptable. Who is "we"? A gun is specifically designed to kill things, but the wielder of the gun decides whether it will be used for good or for evil. Likewise, there are plenty of other objects not designed to kill people that are used for that purpose (stones, rope, buckets of water, etc). Would you consider working on AI countermeasures? Would you want to have a strong defense that can fend off AI invaders, even if it means that defensive force could be re-purposed for offense? > This is extremely idealistic... Ideally, you want to rid the world of conflict and war. But this is impossible while there remain limited resources and different ideas. You would need to find an infinite source of food/water/land as well as force everyone to conform to one ideology to avoid war. So aside from being impossible (as far as resources go), you would need a totalitarian world government imposing thought control on all of humanity to bring about such a "peace."