> I think we have to assume that if a government can hack it, they will try. Perhaps it's sad that a university will help them but I'd also to be assumed that they're going to be trying it in some way.
Sure. And we can also-- for the purpose of thinking about risks-- assume that if a government can torture people, they will.
This doesn't make it right, and it doesn't mean that people should sit idly by. Nor does the fact that people oppose and discourage such actions mean that systems can be left vulnerable to these attacks.
Opposing unethical and abusive behavior is not mutually exclusive with building systems which are robust even against unethical attackers. Human wellbeing is maximized when we do _both_.
Sure. And we can also-- for the purpose of thinking about risks-- assume that if a government can torture people, they will.
This doesn't make it right, and it doesn't mean that people should sit idly by. Nor does the fact that people oppose and discourage such actions mean that systems can be left vulnerable to these attacks.
Opposing unethical and abusive behavior is not mutually exclusive with building systems which are robust even against unethical attackers. Human wellbeing is maximized when we do _both_.