defensive

Sure, they may have the same overhead, but the idea is that your code doesn't do unnecessary defensive cloning all over the place.

The problem is preventing defensive weaponry from becoming offensive weaponry.

So this isn't about whether you are a white guy or being defensive about being a white guy.

Would you want to have a strong defense that can fend off AI invaders, even if it means that defensive force could be re-purposed for offense?

That said, I don't think the post is defensive at all.

If the defensive weapon is initially stationary it could win by being harder to detect.

They'll get defensive because you appeared to give no consideration to their opinion, and they'll disregard anything you say in return.

If they weren't so conflicted about encryption, the logical response would be to get serious about defensive measures and make sure they're more widely available.

Because systems are so complex, defensive techniques will always fall short.

I've read that before and it comes across as overly defensive and very personally biased.

Yep, if you want an immutable list, or whatever, you have to make sure your list is immutable, which usually involves defensive copying.

How is offensive different from defensive in this context?

" Moreover, a treaty certainly does not apply to defensive anti-robot weapons, even if they operate in autonomous mode." That means if a robot is programmed for its defense only then there shouldnt be any treaty for its mass production.

I'm defensive with that statement because there's quite a few "people studying the subject do no better than the average" experiments (in economic) but I think there's a difference between academic knowledge and applied knowledge so if you think about complexity problems often you should do better on this one.

Defensive driving gets a totally different meaning on those roads.