Hacker News Reader

Comment by leftyted | Hacker News Reader

I wouldn't care.

Are the designers of TCP/IP responsible for everyone whose death was assisted by the internet? Are Orville and Wilbur burning in Hell for all the people who were killed by things dropped from planes? And God help whichever unfortunate human invented the wheel. Sorry for my tone, but I find this perspective naive and annoyingly sanctimonious.

I'm making tools. People can use them for whatever. I hope no one murderers anyone (unless they have a really good reason) but I'm only responsible for making sure I don't murder anyone, and so far I'm doing okay.

View on HN

It comes down to intent.

I once had a neighbor who worked at Boeing, programming the guidance systems on smart bombs. The only reason I even remember him to this day is because immediately after introducing what he did for a living, he followed with, "I don't actually pull the trigger. I make the smart bombs smarter so they don't hurt innocent people."

I only remember this exchange because it can be interpreted several different ways.

If you're working on a technology that you know is created in contract with the military, is that not concerning?

What's your line? Do you work on contracts for police? What about the United Nations? Any government contract at all, including local? I can find examples of all of them acting against populations and causing harm, as well for good.

My line is merely understanding and allowing others to protest things they find hurtful and believing they are valid in doing so. I never said I shared this view and I'm concerned you took my words so far from their face value.

> If you're working on a technology that you know is created in contract with the military, is that not concerning?

Implies to me that I should feel bad morally. Just my reading of it, but if lots of people are reading it that way as well, you may want to work on the wording if people are attributing more than you intended.

I have written software that is being used by the military and I didn't find it concerning. I find the anti-military sentiment on this website more concerning.

I'm pretty liberal but I do not think the military is a vestigial organ. Your worldview is not the only worldview. Your morality is not the only morality.

When did I claim a morality or worldview? You may be reading my posts in bad faith.

Your post implies that a person ought to be concerned if the military wants to use software that person has written. To me, it seems obvious that that perspective follows from various propositions about the world and about morality.

If you meant anything other than that by your post, feel free to explain. But I don't see any other way to interpret what you wrote. I don't think I'm guilty of misinterpretation, and certainly not "bad faith" i.e. willful misinterpretation.

I meant it could be reasonable to be concerned.

Concerned why? Because of moral reasons? If not, you need to explain further.

The examples you chose (TCP/IP, airplanes, etc.) show pretty clear willful misinterpretation, and I think you know that.

i worked on software used by military police to record criminal interviews. should i be concerned that it's used by the military, or should i be relieved that the military courts have more accurate/complete recordings?

I think there should be concern that surveillance is also used by the military on leaders in progressive movements, also. Military force has been used against domestic social movements in the near past and possibly continues to be used in the present.

it wasn't surveillance software, and couldn't have been repurposed to that end. it was for recording people being interviewed in connection with military police investigations. it even did its best to prevent the investigators from tampering with the recordings. concerning, or not?

I don't understand, it wasn't surveillance, but it was for recording people?

Have you ever seen a TV show or movie with an interrogation scene? I assume that's what the poster is referring to. Not recording people in their homes or anything untoward like that

You mean the military that has helped ensure the affluence and security of the Western world? The military isn't bad just because it's the military. It serves important and necessary functions, ones that don't go away just because you want it to.

I never claimed to make a position. I merely said that maybe a position against the military is not entirely unreasonable.

"It is not unreasonable for it to be concerning." is a position, by the way.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com