I am a frequent volunteer on poverty and homelessness issues. But, that wasn't really my point.
My comment was more about my opinion of the US military industrial complex; I believe that, in general, working for the war machine in any capacity is actively harmful to the world.
Matt clarified what he'll be doing there (I think; at least, he mentioned things that are being done there that sound nice...presumably he was implying he would be working on those nice things, rather than on more effective ways to kill brown people), and I have conceded that I was assuming the worst and could have been wrong about that assumption.
"working for the war machine in any capacity is actively harmful to the world" <- that's the kind of absolutist statement that is never right and always poisoning a debate. It also does a disservice to thousands of people in the military who really well intended and risk their lives to save others.
There are exceptions, sure. But, on the whole, war brings death, destruction of infrastructure, disruption of families and communities, and overall negative results for both the human condition and the environment. There are probably valid reasons to wage war; but the US is a nation of hawks and war profiteers at the highest levels, and has been for decades (refer to Eisenhower's military industrial complex speech, and nothing has changed since then except the numbers, both monetary and in human lives, are bigger and the wars more frequent).
To be fair, that's not working for the war machine, it's working with the war machine.
But that is a good point - we have the militaries of the US and Britain to thank not only for the internet but the computers accessing it.
And the military industrial complex has Silicon Valley to thank for its ability to conduct mass targeted surveillance through social media and browser exploits, and to kill people with metadata.
Another interesting dilemma would be, would it have been OK to work on the GPS system, back when it was implemented under the auspices of the Reagan Administration?
It must have sounded like the creepiest thing imaginable to young people who were already concerned about the US's saber-rattling posture, but like the Internet that grew out out of the work done at ARPA, it's now an indispensable public utility.
Well, nobody is curing cancer or solving poverty, so by your logic nobody could criticize. Many people are actually doing something to help either cause (from researchers down to the $10 donor), and I think all of them have the right to criticize one's choice.
That's precisely what I said: a lot of people are helping both causes, so they are trying to cure cancer or solve poverty. Possibly including the author of the comment above.
No way would SwellJoe be wasting his time curing cancer and solving poverty, that's petty stuff! No, SwellJoe is doing bigger things, like smart water bottles!
Personal attacks are not welcome here, regardless of how strongly you disagree with someone. When you see a bad subthread, please don't make it even worse. Instead, post something to turn it in a more substantive, less inflamed direction, or simply don't post at all.
I also find it ridiculous that's the standard you set for "community service."