I'm doing my Masters right now and taking a look at the job market / discussions about it. I'm stunned to see people talk about Palantir etc. as if it's just a thing you need to do to get enough money to live comfortably and not the enabling force that is bringing about next-gen warfare with more capacity to kill than all previous technology combined. People go into "defense" because planes flying themselves is cool but that's where their consideration ends. I really wish more people thought about what their efforts enable, directly or otherwise. Like it or not, we are all connected, and there are causal relations between your actions and the harm (or benefit) of others every day. Try to minimize that harm.
I have a good friend who just finished his Master's in CS and considered taking an internship at Palantir. I was very apalled at first how he could even consider to work for a company that are obviously the 'bad guys'.
He comes from one of those countries your president considers a sh*thole and scoring that internship polishes his CV enough so that he can get a stable and high paying job which will allow him to stay and not have to go back there.
Can't really bame him....
You know, I'm inclined to agree with your sentiment. I just think it might be more nuanced. At least to me my friend's suffering is more immediate. Whatever work he would have done there is multiple layers removed from me. I'm not saying that this is ok, but I feel it's just human.
Luckily the story ends with him getting a nice internship at another company that's less problematic.
Well, yes, rationalizing individual behaviour that in aggregate leads to authoritarianism, totalitarianism, genocide, war, ... is "just human". Just as building power structures that add sufficient indirection that allows individuals to use those rationalizations is "just human". And tribalism ... yes, definitely "just human".
But is any of that really a justification for anything? Yes, things are more nuanced, some things are worse than others, sure, but that doesn't really make "but he is my tribe, and he benefited from it" a good justification, does it?
I have to agree again. What you point out is correct and I hope to be able to act accordingly.
My personal take-away is still that these kinds of ethical ponderings are a bit like 'first-world problems'. I have the luxury that I can accept or deny any job based on my personal moral values. If the alternative was to have to go to some place where my life is significantly worse, I'd probably think twice too.
Well, yes, it is understandable what motivates the individual, and depending on what exactly you are weighing against what, it might even be justifiable--but then, the reason why some (actual) shithole countries are shithole countries is essentially this sort of attitude, as that is essentially the rationalization for corruption. I guess the point is that evil institutions do not usually come about due to evil people, and when they do, they are not sustained merely by evil people, so, if we don't want to have them, concentrating on evil people won't do shit, we have to concentrate on the actual cause, and the actual cause are those perfectly understandable, human decisions.
Yes, I did. That's when he explained his situation to me. I mean I was aware of his background, but up to that point I didn't really grasp how strongly that influenced his decision making. In the end I didn't really agree with his POV but I surely did understand and appreciate why he was thinking the way he did.
