touch foxglove NOW 
Alright, no more discussion of the limits of free trade. Let's talk about technology. I saw a lively debate on here between @TheTroubleWithPibbles,
@August,
@Geralt_of_Uganda, etc, about whether it is ethical to develop technologies...
Scenario
This, of course, actually happened
J. Robert Oppenheimer was a brilliant scientist.
being so brilliant, he was able to conceive of, and help build, the greatest weapon known to mankind - the atomic bomb.
Oppenheimer, of course, didn't know the long term consequences of developing such a weapon - but he understood the sheer destructive potential of such a device.
Your question is: Was Oppenheimer acting ethically by assisting to develop the atomic bomb?
NOTE: In this hypothetical, history is at a crossroads. You don't know what will happen in the future - whether the device you created will be used to end life on earth or to usher in a new golden age.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Very unethical, the fact that this happened to Japan gives precedent for it to happen to the homeland, the allies, the good guys. And I believe it will happen too, if the needle is pushed too far.
Just for how it is with war, I donβt think anyone is allowed to make a move and then not suffer from their enemies learning that move and using it against them. It seems to always happen that way, I see it as a matter of time.
It would have been a better thing to demonstrate the capability on barren land, and then set up something like the IAEA to regulate nuclear power and the possibility of nuclear weapons.
I guess it is ethical in that it is understandable. But then it will also be understandable when it blows up in everyoneβs face, backfires etc and the inventors realize regret for what they made. Probably a new generation of weapon will be needed then to settle the score
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Actually they invented something far worse anime and they Unleashed it upon us.
Clearly didn't nuke them enough
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
That weapon already exists, and has been unleashed on the american public to devastating effect. The japanese call it "anime".
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
the us should have invader japan normally so more japs would have died
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Most debates about the use of nuclear weapons are, in the end debates about the morality of strategic bombing, of which Nagasaki is but a single dramatic
example
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
If theyβre so similar and comparable then they were hardly necessary for the war.
Somehow this seems to be the neutral and ethically good argument, idk didnβt make sense to me.
Strategic bombing is also unethical, the idea of a crazy person.
would do well to learn from the 
in war
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Its no more or less necessary than any other weapon, and they're pretty unwieldy, but they do WORK
The physics underlying them are baked in, so they're getting disovered either way a few years to the left or right
I'm just saying that the scientists behind it are in the clear, morally speaking
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context