Post #4382751

2026-08-04 20:44 UTC

@accidentalciso@infosec.exchange Ehhh that implies an equivalence of duty that I'm not sure is present. To me this is the core conceit behind the Ethics of Care. Rather than deriving moral valence from deontology, relationships to others shape decisions about right and wrong. In this case, I am leaning in the direction that one's obligation to protectees outweighs—at least in that moment—a global obligation to the environment/society/whatever.

Replies (1)

@ipsquiggle@sunny.garden 2026-08-04 23:41

@mttaggart@infosec.exchange @accidentalciso@infosec.exchange My recent feelings on these sorts of "global vs local" moral problems, is that the are two lanes, and what's important is that there are people fighting in each lane, and that, when someone from one lane explicitly ask for space, people in the other lane try and give it to them, but everyone needs to acknowledge that a balance is required and that we need to cooperate to solve the biggest problems. So in this case I'd say, if you feel like you can do the most good where you are with what you have, then claim that lane and go for it. But don't stop cooperating with and advocating for those fighting in the other lane. (And/or move to the other lane if it seems that more people are needed there.)

Open ##4395605