Sorry but this sounds like such a populist claim. They probably also write their war plans on Microsoft Word, and drive Fords to the office! Not to mention the simple fact that there are no wars without mistakes. I'm not justifying this specific war, but as a service provider you do not get to approve or reject specific operations.

▲

tsimionescu 40 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

There is a huge difference between your product being used for basic military operations like taking notes or getting from A to B, and your products suggesting military operations that kill hundreds of schoolchildren, an obvious and horrific war crime.

	▲	yoavm 31 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		It's a mistake. If it was done by an auto-correct mechanism, would we still say "maybe don't sell your word processor to the army if you can't vouch for its auto-correct system!!!"? Besides, "taking notes" can literally be listing targets, and "getting from A to B" can be the road to killing them.

▲

7373737373 38 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Thou shalt not kill, that's all there is to it really

If you provide tools that help an organization kill easier, and possibly lazily rely on your inaccurate tools' judgment, and you do not care about the outcomes of these tools' uses, that's on your soul, too.

Yes, causality and attribution are hard sometimes, but it may have been that without it, hundreds of humans would be alive right now, and he doesn't even know. Maybe he should talk to the kids' parents about what alignment means.

	▲	yoavm 27 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Ah, I didn't realize we're having a religous discussion. If all there is to it is "thou shalt not kill" then I guess that according to your POV he shouldn't have sold to the military even if the system was only suggesting "valid" targets.