Whilst I don't think there's any particular problem with building tech to help the government / military run simulations etc; I do think it should be made clear to employees what their work will be used for; especially if they are building some part of a tech stack that will be used for a project built by Unity the company itself. Whilst nobody can really expect Unity to police the projects of external developers - it seems a little disingenuous for Unity to conflate <i>every project made using Unity</i> with projects <i>explicitly built by Unity themselves</i>.<p>> "We believe in the freedom of expression, and as the Unity engine is a tool, a tool that can be downloaded and used by most anyone, it’s impossible to truly police or censor all uses of it," Unity said.<p>From a technical perspective I don't believe greater transparency is an impossible ask, nor even something which should cause any significant amount of administrative overhead. I'm not saying Unity staff should walk out of the job over it - but it does seem to me like there's an ethical concern here that it is within Unity's power to provide greater transparency over, without revealing the specific detail of projects.<p>Ultimately I doubt Unity is going to stop working on government military / contracts; it's up to employees to decide where their ethical line is; but I do think Unity should make it as easy as possible for their own employees to determine whether they're overstepping that line.