zlacker

[parent] [thread] 3 comments
1. TeMPOr+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-06-14 08:06:52
People wonder why execs, not people with actual tech skills. I'll wager that for the military/government, this is not really about what skills those people bring in - it's about that accepting this role puts them under jurisdiction of military justice, and suddenly all kinds of things that are business-as-usual when e.g. dealing with foreign powers, could become potential UCMJ offenses.

Call me conspiracy theorist if you like, but this looks to me like US Gov seeking to put a leash on the tech/AI companies, by tricking execs into getting personally exposed for things that would otherwise qualify as private business. Strategically, that's worth way more than just getting some FAANG engineers as part-time advisors.

replies(3): >>lcnPyl+wm >>dugmar+iu >>esseph+xx
2. lcnPyl+wm[view] [source] 2025-06-14 13:34:36
>>TeMPOr+(OP)
I had this same thought reading some other comments. It doesn’t seem much of a conspiratorial stretch.
3. dugmar+iu[view] [source] 2025-06-14 15:05:46
>>TeMPOr+(OP)
For engineers it would make sense to bring them in as warrant officers which is where you put technical experts that don’t lead.
4. esseph+xx[view] [source] 2025-06-14 15:41:32
>>TeMPOr+(OP)
"When their AI system went wrong and caused that massacre and required a sortie of F-35s to neutralize, we immediately took internal accountability and started processing them through the UCMJ. This kind of thing will never happen again, we are making sure of it."
[go to top]