Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'Lavender': The AI machine directing Israel's bombing in Gaza

972mag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

771–780 of 1001 posts

Re: 'Lavender': The AI machine directing Israel's bombing in Gaza

#771

Post by lobocinza »

Automation of target selection is dangerous and bring ethical concerns but it isn't inherently worse than conventional methods and the killing of civilians (collateral damage) isn't new. I'd like to see how Israeli-Hamas war compares with other recent wars, specially the Russo-Ukrainian. Is this new process really worse, does it lead to more civilians death per legitimate target?

972mag is a left-wing media and what they say should be viewed with skepticism because they follow a pro-Palestine narrative.

Re: 'Lavender': The AI machine directing Israel's bombing in Gaza

#772

Post by xyzelement »

runarberg wrote: post #557
sequoia wrote: post #396

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm OK, I read this a bit differently. I read these sections: > One source stated that human personnel often served only as a “rubber stamp” for the machine’s decisions, adding that, normally, they would personally devote only about “20 seconds” to each target before authorizing a bombing — just to make sure the Lavender-marked target is male. > According to the sources, the army knew that the minimal human supervisio…

We also have to be open to the possibility that Israel is committing a genocide and the goal is to kill as many Palestinians as possible and terrorize the rest. That the AI system’s main purpose isn’t to be accurate in selecting target, but rather to manufacture a reason to kill more Palestinians than a human ever could. Another function could be to remove accountability from a targeting officer. Zero-error is never…

This is an obviously wrong analysis. Killing the most people possible would require no AI in this situation.

Re: 'Lavender': The AI machine directing Israel's bombing in Gaza

#773

Post by aaron695 »

rightbyte wrote: post #426

How does this system get the input? Are Palestinians using IDF tapped cell towers? Or is it possible to use roaming towers for this? Is e.g. Google or Facebook involved on a mobile OS or app level? Maybe backdoors local to the area? It seems like the whole cell phone infrastructure need to be torn down.

[dead]

Re: 'Lavender': The AI machine directing Israel's bombing in Gaza

#774

Post by Georgelemental »

screye wrote: post #598

Technology like this raises a moral conundrum. Minimizing deaths is the humane approach to war. So we move away from broad killing mechanisms (shelling, crude explosives, carpet bombing), in favor of precise killing machines. Drones, targeted missiles and now AI allow you to be ruthlessly efficient in killing an enemy. The question is - How cold and not-human-like can these methods be, if they are in fact reducing ov…

It's not about the tech, it's about how humans use it. In this case, the IDF seems to be using tech to commit mass murder of civilians. The issue is the mass murder, not the tech.

Re: 'Lavender': The AI machine directing Israel's bombing in Gaza

#775

Post by Georgelemental »

resource_waste wrote: post #294

I'm probably pro-isreal because I'm a realpolitik American that wants America's best interest. (But I'm not strong either way) Just watched someone get their post deleted for criticizing Israel's online PR/astroturfing. Israel's ability to shape online discussion has left a bad taste in my mouth. Trust is insanely low, I think the US should get a real military base in Israel in exchange for our effort. If the US gets…

I'm a realpolitik American that wants America's best interest, which is why I 100% oppose Israel's war. Israel has spent decades playing us for fools, disregarding all our concerns and making the world hate us while taking billions of our money. Here is how Netanyahu talks about us: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lW8TxOwYte0

https://ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/

Re: 'Lavender': The AI machine directing Israel's bombing in Gaza

#776

Post by wahnfrieden »

firejake308 wrote: post #652
Quanttek wrote: post #108

Years ago, scholars (such as Didier Bigo) have already raised concerns about the targeting of individuals merely based on (indirect) association with a "terrorist" or "criminal". Originally used in the context of surveillance (see Snowden revelations), such systems would target anyone who would be e.g. less than 3-steps away from an identified individual, thereby removing any sense of due process or targeted surveill…

Practical AI did a podcast episode about the dangers of using AI models as a shield to hide behind in justifying your decisions. The episode was titled "Suspicion Machines" and based on the libked article [1], and I think it's worth a read/listen. [1]: https://www.wired.com/story/welfare-state-algorithms/

It's also an incentive to use it - accountability evasion.

Re: 'Lavender': The AI machine directing Israel's bombing in Gaza

#778

Post by Georgelemental »

harimau777 wrote: post #62
janice1999 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> AI based killing technology is actually more ethical and safer than warfare that doesn’t use AI No. It's just a tool. People still configure the parameters and ultimately make decisions. Likewise modern missile do not make conflicts more or less ethical just because they require advanced physics.

The people mentioned in the article say that they spent about 20 seconds on each target and basically just rubber stamped them. In that case, I don't think people are ultimately making the decisions in a traditional sense.

People made the decision not to spend that extra time before ordering a killing.

Re: 'Lavender': The AI machine directing Israel's bombing in Gaza

#779

Post by 8note »

cm2187 wrote: post #454
jhallenworld wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I imagine you get to tune the probability window of "person is >90% likely a Hamas terrorist" and choose how many innocent people you kill. Who set the window? "Hamas terrorist" criteria: a male of fighting age, give higher weight to those congregating with others of fighting age. Basically take out a generation of Palestinian men and you're all set. Lovely. >This sentence is horrifically dystopian... "in order to sa…

A war that would only kill 10% civilians would be a massive improvement over any recent conflict.

I imagine that's very WW1-y and is a sign that the military leadership is just sending soldiers to die without care

Re: 'Lavender': The AI machine directing Israel's bombing in Gaza

#780

Post by NomDePlum »

CommieBobDole wrote: post #128
Quanttek wrote: post #108

Years ago, scholars (such as Didier Bigo) have already raised concerns about the targeting of individuals merely based on (indirect) association with a "terrorist" or "criminal". Originally used in the context of surveillance (see Snowden revelations), such systems would target anyone who would be e.g. less than 3-steps away from an identified individual, thereby removing any sense of due process or targeted surveill…

It's also interesting (and I guess typical for end-users of software) how quickly and easily something like this goes from "Here's a tool you can use as an information input when deciding who to target" to "I dunno, computer says these are the people we need to kill, let's get to it". In the Guardian article, an IDF spokesperson says it exists and is only used as the former, and I'm sure that's what was intended and…

I read that article and feel your interpretation is very misleading/wrong.

The Guardian article makes it clear prior to those denials that those higher-up appear to not to care how accurate it is and appear to be making a conscious choice to accept the fact it is highly flawed on the basis that it might kill some of whom they would legitimately claim as valid targets.

It's clear from the operational details discussed in the article the critical target number is largely number of kills, regardless of whether they are any actual material threat, or not.

Cull predominantly the male population and their family members, not assassinate active threats is the overall impression I got of the Israeli strategy.

I must add that anyone claiming the use of AI and inference models in this way is in anyway justifiable needs to seek help. The claim of 90% accuracy is almost certainly over claiming by over 100%.

Post reply on HN