this post was submitted on 22 Apr 2025
1119 points (96.6% liked)

memes

14362 readers
3317 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 56 points 19 hours ago (6 children)

I had a friend in a difficult position, deciding between high pay at Buy N Large or the opportunity to work on insanely cool shit for Death Inc.

Ultimately he chose Death Inc, and the reasoning was along the lines of "This might kill a hundred people, but at least it'll kill them specifically. I can't even conceptualize the harm Amazon et al. do on a global scale to entire populations without even trying".

Made me think. I didn't have a very good answer to that.

[–] bestagon@lemmy.world 4 points 5 hours ago

That’s an interesting take. One on one side the death is a haphazard byproduct and on the other it is at least motivated by someone. Somebody has to have a vision for why these weapons need to be used. I’d argue though that in the case of Amazon, wether or not it’s of any priority to them, the suffering would be something worth ironing out over time whereas, for weapons companies, it’s the entire product they sell

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago

I worked gps until i determined The Customer was not interested in reducing civilian casualties.

They wanted the induced fear, priming the next generation ready for revenge, the garuntee of future business.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

It should make you think about how your friend is in a brainwashed delusion.

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Not quite, no. Not everyone works on the weapons.

[–] valtia@lemmy.world 29 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

those bombs will kill far more than just a hundred people, far more than he can ever conceptualize. the consequences of those deaths will shape the world more than the extra microsecond an engineer could shave off of an internal Amazon function

[–] baines@lemmy.cafe 2 points 5 hours ago

yea but nestle

[–] Prox@lemmy.world 22 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Also, "if I don't make this thing that will kill a hundred people specifically, they'll just use something that kills more people with less precision / more casualties."

[–] Rekorse@sh.itjust.works 2 points 10 hours ago

Ah good ole ego.

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 11 points 17 hours ago (7 children)

How is precision weaponry "insanely cool shit"???

[–] SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 3 hours ago

Military technology has got a near unlimited budget, that means you get tons of cool and technically impressive toys and things to work with

I enjoy watching the breakdowns of the most advanced weaponry and stuff like jet fighters (that we have access to information about), nuclear armaments, and other stuff like that, because they are very very impressive from an engineering perspective

But, of course, I really do strongly hate them for existing in terms of their actual purpose. It would be much cooler for similar engineering feats to be in use for civilian purposes. But I can't deny that they are amazing from a purely technical perspective

[–] expr@programming.dev 11 points 9 hours ago

Anduril has had many, many recruiters desperately trying to get me to work for them. On the surface, what they make does sound incredibly cool: embedded systems/operating systems for autonomous robotics.

The only problem is those robots happen to be death bots (and Palmer Luckey, who makes me want to stay far, far away).

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 7 hours ago

That's how the entire "education" process goes. They lure kids with promises of making cool video games or whatnot. Then they brainwash them, teach them helplessness, and exploit their entire life in order to profit from murdering people.

[–] trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world 38 points 16 hours ago

I mean it's impressive from an engineering standpoint

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 3 points 10 hours ago

Well, I can't get into details, but the field is vast.

[–] gedhrel@lemmy.world 6 points 13 hours ago

It means you can take out the bride's party, or the groom's party.

[–] EstonianGuy@lemm.ee 10 points 15 hours ago (3 children)

Technically if you think about it, he’d be saving innocent lives, since non precise weapons have more collateral damage. Might as well make bombs accurate and hit the right targets.

[–] BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee 1 points 7 hours ago

Shame that the right targets are often schools, hospitals, weddings, and apartment complexes

[–] valtia@lemmy.world 15 points 15 hours ago

The "right targets" tend to be innocent lives as well. Besides, who said anything about precise weaponry? These days, it's all about AI, where precision is actually not the goal

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 7 hours ago

If we're murdering the planet, we might as well do it well! hur dur....