Live data from Hacker News

Leaked Emails Show Google Expected Military Drone AI Work to Grow Exponentially

theintercept.com

221–230 of 527 posts

Re: Leaked Emails Show Google Expected Military Drone AI Work to Grow Exponentially

#221
post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you boil down your statement into "I would rather have the Americans kill these people than the Chinese" you will begin to see the real meaning of what you are saying.

Maybe I’d ask the Vietnamese, who we fought, who they’d rather have, or the afghans who fought the USSR, who they’d rather have to get the meaning of what I’m saying. You can also ask the Pakistanis if they’d rather have US or India, go ahead.

Why are these posed as either/or? The Vietnamese/Afghan people would rather have either side than the dual sided proxy war they received.

Re: Leaked Emails Show Google Expected Military Drone AI Work to Grow Exponentially

#222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn’t a well reasoned position at all. You can’t summarily declare that all wars or actions taken by the military are morally equivalent to an ethnoreligios genocide.

Is there another use for these drones right now? Because all I've seen is pretty close to "ethnoreligious genocide". Many people straightforwardly advocate for it. Can you really pretend that you're developing "neutral" weapons technology in this climate?

Appealing to mindless outrage is not a rational argument. Please list all of the genocides that the USA’s drone program has participated in.

If anything, it seems this google technology would reduce the number of civilian casualties.

Re: Leaked Emails Show Google Expected Military Drone AI Work to Grow Exponentially

#223
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they oppose the drone warfare program, which is killing noncombatants in nominally allied countries. https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_561fafe2e4b028dd7ea6c4ff https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/the-oba... It’s not the military that is evil, it’s this particular program in the eyes of many. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-24557333 Disclaimer: I am also fortunate to work at Google an…

>Because they oppose the drone warfare program, which is killing noncombatants in nominally allied countries. I don't understand this logic. Drones are a weapon. They are not any more evil than any other weapon that the military uses. They aren't killing people autonomously. There is a human pilot behind every death. The pilot just happens to be hundreds or thousands miles away from the aircraft. Would we be fine wit…

> I don't understand this logic. Drones are a weapon. They are not any more evil than any other weapon that the military uses. They aren't killing people autonomously. There is a human pilot behind every death. The pilot just happens to be hundreds or thousands miles away from the aircraft. Would we be fine with the military killing the exact same people if the pilot was simply on the aircraft that launched the missiles or bombs?

Not "fine", but I think "maybe a little bit less horrified" might be accurate, because a remote video feed apparently makes it even harder to tell what you're shooting [1]:

What the public needs to understand is that the video provided by a drone is not usually clear enough to detect someone carrying a weapon, even on a crystal-clear day with limited cloud and perfect light. This makes it incredibly difficult for the best analysts to identify if someone has weapons for sure. One example comes to mind: "The feed is so pixelated, what if it's a shovel, and not a weapon?" I felt this confusion constantly, as did my fellow UAV analysts. We always wonder if we killed the right people, if we endangered the wrong people, if we destroyed an innocent civilian's life all because of a bad image or angle.

Another former operator said similarly [2]:

Bryant stared at the screen, frozen. “There’s this giant flash, and all of a sudden there’s no person there.” He looked over at the pilot and asked, “Did that look like a child to you?” They typed a chat message to their screener, an intelligence observer who was watching the shot from “somewhere in the world”—maybe Bagram, maybe the Pentagon, Bryant had no idea—asking if a child had just run directly into the path of their shot.

“And he says, ‘Per the review, it’s a dog.’ “

Bryant and the pilot replayed the shot, recorded on eight-millimeter tape. They watched it over and over, the figure darting around the corner. Bryant was certain it wasn’t a dog.

Though in any case it seems like quite an awful argument that distancing yourself from whom your killing should be fine because killing-isn't-okay-anyway-so-whatever.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/29/drones...

[2] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/...

Re: Leaked Emails Show Google Expected Military Drone AI Work to Grow Exponentially

#224
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because they oppose the drone warfare program, which is killing noncombatants in nominally allied countries. https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_561fafe2e4b028dd7ea6c4ff https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/the-oba... It’s not the military that is evil, it’s this particular program in the eyes of many. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-24557333 Disclaimer: I am also fortunate to work at Google an…

>Because they oppose the drone warfare program, which is killing noncombatants in nominally allied countries. I don't understand this logic. Drones are a weapon. They are not any more evil than any other weapon that the military uses. They aren't killing people autonomously. There is a human pilot behind every death. The pilot just happens to be hundreds or thousands miles away from the aircraft. Would we be fine wit…

"If your problem is with killing people, it should be with the people who ordered the killing and not the specific weapon that was used to carry out the killing."

Drone strikes, as they are used, are a more evil way of taking out identified targets of other nationalities. I find the concept of a nation state summarily assassinating people a bit troubling, but drone strikes make it even worse by making it imprecise and cheap.

Drone strikes without on the ground operators create huge collateral damage [0].

When operating in a civilian area, it's far less precise to handle the targeting based on a video stream and to send in a hellfire missile rather than have on the ground operators identify the target and pull the trigger.

Effectively, they are using civilian casualties as credits to buy military lives and convenient and rapid force projection capabilities. Any calculus that considers innocent lives as accepted collateral - when you have other options that are just more expensive or difficult can be considered evil.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_from_U.S._...

Re: Leaked Emails Show Google Expected Military Drone AI Work to Grow Exponentially

#225

The world runs on violence. It's the fundamental force that keeps things in order. Modern society with all its rules and laws is nothing without enforcement, which is ultimately delivered via a monopoly license granted to the government with its military and police to keep everyone else safe and free. Being the best at deploying violence is how you defend against the chaos elsewhere. This isn't about "evil corporatio…

> You either stay ahead or lose the war before it's ever begun. We must be able to do better than that. http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

It's been a long time since I've read this, but I believe it is stating what I said in much more eloquent terms. I'm unsure what you mean by "do better than that"?

Re: Leaked Emails Show Google Expected Military Drone AI Work to Grow Exponentially

#226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is "evil" about working with the military or developing weapons? In case your question is serious: There are still some of us who believe in peace as an end-goal for us humans, as a race. See Kant's "Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_Peace:_A_Philosophic... ) for a more detailed view on the subject. "Working with the military or developing weapons" are two activ…

The military's purpose in modern times is not to bring peace, it is to preserve peace. I find it an important distinction, as "bringing" peace sounds like the military's purpose is to force outsiders who may be viewed as unpeaceful to adopt new culture which is viewed as more peaceful. To "preserve" peace implies, at least to me, that the military is focused on the peace of the home population, and may take action el…

> "[B]ringing" peace sounds like the military's purpose is to force outsiders who may be viewed as unpeaceful to adopt new culture which is viewed as more peaceful.

Well, that definitely seems to be the purpose of the US military.

Re: Leaked Emails Show Google Expected Military Drone AI Work to Grow Exponentially

#227
post #196
post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, what’s the alternate option? If the US hadn’t been the “police” of the world. It could have been Russia or China or India, would we rather have had them? And don’t say Europe unless you consider France and the U.K. and others and their things. We don’t live on a vacuum. If you create one, someone will fill it. I am loath to think of how much worse things could be despite the idiotic wars of Obama and W., I thin…

Absolute ridiculous false dilemma. It is not that if the US hadn't chosen to invade Vietnam and to kill everything that moves someone else would have, the US just opted to do that on their own. And it was not like they were there to free the people (from whom anyway, they were not enslaved). There was no vacuum to fill, the same goes for Iraq, Afghanistan, were the US created the vacuum that was afterwards filled by…

I don't think most people in the US will care about such issues until there's a program similar to the 1033[0], where hand-me-down autonomous drones are deployed agaisnt the civilian population stateside and weddings start getting double-tapped by MQ9 descendants.

Loin des yeux, loin du cœur.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1033_program

Re: Leaked Emails Show Google Expected Military Drone AI Work to Grow Exponentially

#228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What is "evil" about working with the military or developing weapons? In case your question is serious: There are still some of us who believe in peace as an end-goal for us humans, as a race. See Kant's "Perpetual Peace: A Philosophical Sketch" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perpetual_Peace:_A_Philosophic... ) for a more detailed view on the subject. "Working with the military or developing weapons" are two activ…

The military's purpose in modern times is not to bring peace, it is to preserve peace. I find it an important distinction, as "bringing" peace sounds like the military's purpose is to force outsiders who may be viewed as unpeaceful to adopt new culture which is viewed as more peaceful. To "preserve" peace implies, at least to me, that the military is focused on the peace of the home population, and may take action el…

The idea of the military preserving peace is like thinking a group of horny boys will preserve virginity.

The US is the most aggressive military on Earth. There's no peace in its presence.

Re: Leaked Emails Show Google Expected Military Drone AI Work to Grow Exponentially

#229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Extending this argument, would you be OK if they helped other countries as well? Or just your country? I am trying to see if you are arguing from a patriotic perspective or saying that there is nothing wrong with military collaboration in general? I don't see why a company should only collaborate preferentially with one country. Either they shouldn't collaborate with any military as a part of some policy, which I don…

> Would you be OK if they helped other countries as well? That would depend on how closely that country's interests and values are aligned with my own. This is what arms export regulations are intended to address.

A "country's interests" are not that of most of their population. Okay, gray and fuzzy area: When most citizens of European countries where enthusiastic when WWI started, does that mean that war was in their interest? So let's add the condition that you are not under the influence of propaganda and group-think and ha time to assess and feel the effects of policies. It's still fuzzy though: If you, directly or indirectly, depend on income streams that flow through the military–industrial complex, is war in your interest if you yourself are not negatively impacted?

Re: Leaked Emails Show Google Expected Military Drone AI Work to Grow Exponentially

#230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You either stay ahead or lose the war before it's ever begun. We must be able to do better than that. http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/07/30/meditations-on-moloch/

It's been a long time since I've read this, but I believe it is stating what I said in much more eloquent terms. I'm unsure what you mean by "do better than that"?

I mean that what you posed is a false dilemma: we must be able to solve our coordination problems or face extinction.
Post reply on HN