Anduril Founder Luckey: Every Country Needs a 'Warrior Class' Excited To Enact 'Violence on Others in Pursuit of Good Aims'
- Reference: 0175178645
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/24/10/02/1423221/anduril-founder-luckey-every-country-needs-a-warrior-class-excited-to-enact-violence-on-others-in-pursuit-of-good-aims
- Source link:
Luckey revealed that Anduril supplied weapons to Ukraine two weeks into the Russian invasion, lamenting that earlier involvement could have made "a really big difference." He criticized Western hesitancy on AI development, claiming adversaries are waging a "shadow campaign" against it in the United Nations. Contradicting his co-founder's stance, Luckey endorsed fully autonomous weapons, comparing them favorably to indiscriminate landmines.
[1] https://techcrunch.com/2024/10/01/palmer-luckey-every-country-needs-a-warrior-class-excited-to-enact-violence-on-others-in-pursuit-of-good-aims/
let's play global thermonuclear war (Score:4, Insightful)
let's play global thermonuclear war
What side do you want?
Define "Good Aims" (Score:5, Insightful)
> The defense tech entrepreneur, known for his Hawaiian shirts and mullet, argued that societies need people "excited about enacting violence on others in pursuit of good aims."
So, for example, if the "wrong candidate" wins the U.S. 2024 presidential election, it's OK for the losing side to enact "violence on others in pursuit of good aims"?
movie (Score:2)
[1]https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1... [imdb.com]
[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1059786/
Re: (Score:2)
You can't be arsed to protest, but expect us to believe you'll sign up for a civil war?
Re: (Score:1)
> Funny tho, when that violence in the US happens, it's always one side committing it. Never the other.
> If my candidate loses there will be much grumbling and bitching and flipped fingers from my side. There will be no riots from our side.
Conservatives lost that moral high ground on January 6th, 2021. Whether or not you believe it rises to the level of "insurrection" or no matter how many people were non-violent, that does not change the objective fact that there was a fucking riot at and in the Capitol building and that those engaging in said rioting were supporters of the alleged conservative candidate.
I ate a fuckton of crow after the 2020 election because I said the exact same thing you did above (well, not the "my candidate" part becau
Re: Define "Good Aims" (Score:2)
> There will be no riots from our side.
"Your side" burns, loots and murders indiscriminately. The others, whether they are morally justified or not, go after what they percieve to be the root of the problem. If you can explain how smashing the windows of a few Starbucks or robbing pot shops will advance the welfare of mankind, I'm sure many here would be interested.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sure he is thinking along the lines of Antifa or Black Panthers and not along the lines of the KKK or border guards shooting refugees. /s
Great idea (Score:3)
It would be good to eliminate psychopaths from society, so let's send the first warrior to this guy.
Re: (Score:3)
This guy is just another chickenhawk. Lots of them around.
You rarely hear someone who actually saw combat who talks like this.
Re: (Score:2)
> This guy is just another chickenhawk. Lots of them around.
> You rarely hear someone who actually saw combat who talks like this.
Yup. There's always someone who is willing to shed someone else's blood ...
Competition (Score:3)
He's... not wrong.
We should be really scared of people who are excited about finding ways to kill people we (or our allies) are in conflict with, but they're a necessary evil as those people exist on the other side of the conflict.
They are weapons, ideally to be controlled by more measured and compassionate people, and deployed in self-defense against people who aren't quite so restrained.
For instance, the people finding new ways to kill Russian troops in Ukraine. They're getting lots of people killed, but it's justified because Russia invaded and started indiscriminately killing a lot of innocent people.
Re:Competition (Score:5, Insightful)
A lot of people would agree with "necessary evil." Being "excited about enacting violence" though...? No, that's no good. Even in military units, the dutiful warriors recognize a distinction between themselves and the psychos.
Re: (Score:2)
You can try to be the mournful moral guy who regrets firing every round, but you'll go nuts faster than the guy propagandized into hating the enemy as subhuman and enthusiastic about shooting 'monsters'.
People (surprisingly) really don't like killing people. You will not have an effective military if they're worried about the people they're supposed to be killing.
What you want them to do is to care about collateral damage and avoid conflating enemy combatants and civilians and compartmentalize their motiva
Re: (Score:2)
> He's... not wrong.
> We should be really scared of people who are excited about finding ways to kill people we (or our allies) are in conflict with, but they're a necessary evil as those people exist on the other side of the conflict.
> They are weapons, ideally to be controlled by more measured and compassionate people, and deployed in self-defense against people who aren't quite so restrained.
> For instance, the people finding new ways to kill Russian troops in Ukraine. They're getting lots of people killed, but it's justified because Russia invaded and started indiscriminately killing a lot of innocent people.
Like the [1]Training Day [imdb.com] quote...
"To protect the sheep you gotta catch the wolf, and it takes a wolf to catch a wolf."
[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0139654/
Re: (Score:2)
No, he's wrong, you just don't think so because you can only think of yourself. "More measured and compassionate people" don't view others as "weapons" to be "deployed", though clearly you do.
"For instance, the people finding new ways to kill Russian troops in Ukraine. They're getting lots of people killed, but it's justified because Russia invaded and started indiscriminately killing a lot of innocent people."
Where in that example is there a "warrior class" that is "excited to enact ‘violence on oth
It's sad and unfortunate... (Score:3)
...that barbaric people like that exist
Hopefully, someday, we will evolve beyond violence and war
Nope, just evolution, thank the US military (Score:2)
> ...that barbaric people like that exist Hopefully, someday, we will evolve beyond violence and war
Ukraine seemed pretty peaceful. I don't think the occupants of the World Trade Center in 2001 "deserved" violence. The shitty fact about life is you have to be ready to enact violence or else you will have violence enacted on you. I don't fear for my safety and have been able to live in peace and prosperity because my country has a long history attacking people when provoked.
Of course, every contrarian POS on /. will point out a list of all the terrible things the US military has done, but on balance,
Re: (Score:2)
"Thanks to the US Navy, the world has been prosperous and piracy is barely a thing. If we weren't patrolling the ocean, you know countries would "seize" civilian ships all the time."
Seizing ships, who would do such a thing! oh wait, the US does that.
[1]https://www.ft.com/content/878... [ft.com]
Ukraine was more peaceful before the 2014 Maidan coup backed by the US. It's not the only one the US has done in the last 20 years, either. The above post is peak American mind state: fat, happy and 100% ignorant of what your cou
[1] https://www.ft.com/content/8781270a-bcdb-440f-9cfa-305cdc101cdf
Re: (Score:2)
> ...that barbaric people like that exist Hopefully, someday, we will evolve beyond violence and war
Right now we lift people like this up. Deranged psychopath? Promote that motherfucker to the C-Suites, or better yet, have him run for office!
We're headed the wrong direction to move beyond violence. We've let ourselves be led down a path where hate is our prime motivation, and violence is the end-result of hate as an ethos.
So? (Score:5, Informative)
The headline itself seems to be meant to elicit outrage, but only amongst people who refuse to live in the real world. For the rest of us, who understand that the role of a state is to hold the monopoly on the use of violence in society, it's hardly a shocking idea. In general, you can't go forcibly take someone's stuff, but the court can decide that you *must* pay someone, and the police will happily accompany the creditor to your house so they can take your stuff. The state can evict you from your house, and if you refuse to leave, you will be forced to leave. And when it comes to geopolitical interactions... "Speak softly and carry a big stick" is the way it's done. This is not just how the world works, but until humans literally evolve into something different (ala Star Trek), this is how the world *must* work. Criminology 101 says womething like 20 to 25% of people would be willing to commit a crime for personal gain if they thought they could get away with it. All of our laws, rules, social norms and international agreements... everything that makes up our society... at the end of the day can only exist because some mechanism exists to force compliance. People don't realize this?
Re: (Score:2)
If you haven't yet, read TimeOday's comment above.
Is perfidy against machines legal? (Score:2)
Lately I've been pondering the question of perfidy in relation to autonomous weapons. Is fooling a machine into thinking you are a friend the same as wearing your opponents uniform? Or is it perfectly acceptable like a decoy used to distract seekers?
Re: (Score:2)
A few years back, I was writing a term paper about autonomous weaponry (more from a legal viewpoint), but I really hate the concept of them in general. I'm going to have to go dredge it up and reread it.
What a tool. (Score:3)
Someone needs to inform him that selling weapons does not make him a "warrior." A more appropriate term would be "chaos vampire".
Is this guy an idiot? (Score:2)
or a 12 year old that watches too many "bad-ass" movies?
Incentives, incentives... (Score:2)
I doubt Lucky cares; he gets to move product and fantasize either way; but it seems like a trivially bad idea to cultivate people who are "enthusiastic" about 'enacting violence' rather than merely willing.
The old "when all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail" issue is bad enough; but if all you have is a hammer and you really enjoy hammering it will be a full time job keeping you from finding nails everywhere and getting out of hand.
Not really the violent type (Score:2)
This guy looks like he's an 18 year old programmer with chin pubes. Probably never been in a fight in his life.
This pampered rich guy is advocating for warfare because *he is going to profit off it*, and because *he likes it*. Is that a good reason to commit violence? Because it'll make you money and you like it?
For most of the development of "civilized" culture, there has been a focus on warfare as a means of _survival_, in addition to increasing personal and national wealth. Western Europe (and probably A
This is correct (Score:2)
In a fallen world with imperfect people, every society must be willing to use violence to protect itself. It doesn't meant you always have to use violence, but you have to credibly be willing and able.
Luckey lives in the real world (Score:2)
AI and robotics are coming with or without your approval. It will be better if the US is at the forefront
We will need it [1]given what Biden/Harris has unleashed on America [x.com].
[1] https://x.com/shellenberger/status/1839741316068192551
What a naive idiot (Score:1)
EVERYONE thinks they're right. Every dictator, in fact every person in prison can justify their actions in their own head.
Another warmongering POS (Score:1)
We don't need that, we need less of people like him.
Nominations (Score:2)
I hereby nominate fucktard Palmer Luckey to be the first recipient of this "enacting violence on others in pursuit of good aims."
Let him have a taste of his own medicine and see how it goes down.
"Rough Men" (Score:2)
"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
Maybe someday that will no longer be true--we can only hope. But that day is not today.
For Every Swole Jeff Bezos (Score:3)
And you're saying these pale VR-besotted couch worms are this warrior caste?
Re: (Score:3)
> And you're saying these pale VR-besotted couch worms are this warrior caste?
I mean, yeah.
What are you imagining it would be? An ancient Greek hoplite phalanx, full of ripped dudes obsessed with honor, yet harbouring a gentle disposition for their family back home?
Re: (Score:2)
No, I was thinking more of Brown Shirts.
Re: (Score:3)
I want to agree, but there are some crazy videos out there of little remote control drones stalking, seemingly taunting, then finally obliterating a solder on the ground running in every direction with no escape. In the Ukraine war, at least the videos they choose to release, the most physical soldiers are the doomed Russian meat waves.
Maybe this turning point was reached way back with artillery in WWI.
Re: (Score:2)
> And you're saying these pale VR-besotted couch worms are this warrior caste?
Uh, yes. With appropriate amounts of focus on those autonomous solutions. Fire, forget, and order pizza. All right from the comfort of a basement couch.