Because what could possibly go wrong.

You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
1 point

OK, but the military is not just a nail company. They make way more stuff than just weapons, a lot of regular things came out of military funding.

For all the seller knows they could be using it for search and rescue. They are not responsible for the end result of what happens to their product when it ends up in the consumers or buyers hands.

Only in cases of negligence does that apply.

The military using these robots as weapons is very different from Boston dynamics using these robots as weapons

It’s really quite simple.

That said, you seem to think the seller of a product has a responsibility to sell only to safe places that won’t go against their own morals and values, and you may have a valid point to that but that’s an entirely different thing than saying “Boston dynamics is itself making robot death machines”.

They make machine that become death machines when modified, would be a more correct statement.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

The marines have this video showing exactly what they are doing with them. You aren’t doing search and rescue with a grenade launcher.

I’m not concerned with this ending up in court either. Boston Dynamics is 100% responsible because without them there wouldn’t be murder bots because the military wouldn’t have their bots to build on. Could the military build their own? Of course but they are buying them from BD instead and that’s why we should absolutely hold them responsible.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology@stad

!tech@lemmy.stad.social

Create post

Technology News and Opinion

Community stats

  • 10

    Monthly active users

  • 31

    Posts

  • 98

    Comments

Community moderators