901–910 of 1001 posts
> The following investigation is organized according to the six chronological stages of the Israeli army’s highly automated target production in the early weeks of the Gaza war. First, we explain the Lavender machine itself, which marked tens of thousands of Palestinians using AI. Second, we reveal the “Where’s Daddy?” system, which tracked these targets and signaled to the army when they entered their family homes.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the flip side, in this war many of the Gaza combatants are either irregular forces or militants deliberately wearing civilian clothing. So if some guy in a track suit and flip-flops uses an anti tank grenade launcher, discards the empty tube, walks away, and gets lit up, then the next day the Internet is awash with videos of the “IDF murdering a civilian!” For reference, I think both sides are in the wrong in this…
Children and women do not shoot up tanks
Additional automated systems, including one called “Where’s Daddy?” also revealed here for the first time, were used specifically to track the targeted individuals and carry out bombings when they had entered their family’s residences. this means they are actually targeting the children phones at night presupposing their father is in their proximity. they are doing this because Hamas operatives probably don't take th…
Apart from all the horribleness and knowingly mudering civilians the idea of a 9to5 soldier that performs military activity then goes home to his family, well within range of weapons and intelligence of the enemy and expecting he and his family will be safe there while he sleeps is a bit insane. I can't imagine any army hellbent on winning fast would pass up on that opportunity. USA didn't exactly have much stricter…
I am more curious about the “compute” of an AI system like this. It must be extremely complicated to do real-time video feed auditing and classification of targets, etc. How is this even possible to do without having the system make a lot of mistakes? As much AI talk there is on HN these days, I would have recalled an article that talks about this kind of military-grade capability. Are there any resources I can look…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Everyone else is a civilian that can only be directly targeted when and for as long as they directly participate in hostilities, such as by taking up arms, planning military operations, laying down mines, etc. There is some incredible magic that often happens: as soon as anyone is targeted and killed, they immediately transform from civilians to "collaborators", "terrorists", "militants" etc. Of course everything i…
On the flip side, in this war many of the Gaza combatants are either irregular forces or militants deliberately wearing civilian clothing. So if some guy in a track suit and flip-flops uses an anti tank grenade launcher, discards the empty tube, walks away, and gets lit up, then the next day the Internet is awash with videos of the “IDF murdering a civilian!” For reference, I think both sides are in the wrong in this…
Speaking of "armchair international law experts", this is completely wrong.
BLUF: Failing to distinguish does not deprive you of fundamental guarantees of humane treatment, including the prohibition of torture and summary execution - both of which are war crimes.
The individual obligation to distinguish is linked to Prisoner of War (POW) status - those who do not distinguish, do not get the protections of that status. That is the only consequence of the failure to distinguish. All those persons who are not POWs are automatically civilians, as made clear by the residual clause in Article 4(4) Fourth Geneva Convention (GC IV). While civilians can be interned for "imperative reasons of security", they are entitled to their own detailed treatment obligations (Articles 79-135 GC IV). In any case, even if they are somehow not entitled to that treatment, the fundamental humane treatment guarantees of Art 27 GC IV [1] and Art 75 Additional Protocol I [2] (which, as customary law, applies to all parties to a conflict) nonetheless apply. If we argue that it is a non-international armed conflict (which knows neither POW status nor the obligation to distinguish), Common Article 3 [3] similarly obligates humane treatment. Humane treatment is also a norm under customary law [4].
Under these rules, you cannot torture people and you cannot summarily execute people [4]. Read the provisions yourself. In fact, summary execution and torture are actual war crimes [5]. If you want to punish a person, you need to give them a fair trial (IHL does not prohibit the death penalty).
You seem to be hinting at the Bush-era "illegal enemy combatant" theory but even the Bush Admin never argued that those persons are not entitled to humane treatment (it was mostly about fair trial rights), and the US (as its lone defender) has long since abandoned the position.
Whether Hamas is actually subject to such an obligation to distinguish is highly controversial. On one level is the issue of conflict classification, since POW status and the obligation to distinguish only exist in the law of international armed conflict (IAC). If we accept that there is an IAC (e.g. because of the military occupation), then the question still arises if Hamas somehow "belongs" to the State of Palestine or if they should just be seen as civilians directly participating in hostilities or as being in a parallel non-international armed conflict between Hamas and Israel. In turn, if we accept that there is an obligation to distinguish applicable to Hamas, then Israel also needs to treat Hamas fighters that distinguished as POWs (and, as set out above, if they failed to distinguish, as civilians).
[1]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/art...
[2]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/api-1977/arti...
[3]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/art...
[4]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule87 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule89 https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule90
[5]: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule156
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Guns/AI don't kill people. People do. If someone should be held responsible, it's the people that order the strikes.
Sorry. Guns do kill people. That's their whole point. I know roughly ~1000 people. Maybe 10 of them have the physical capability of killing someone, in case you don't know, it's not actually that easy to do it yourself. Of those not all could mentally do it under anything but the most extreme of circumstances. 2, maybe 3 might be actually capable of ending a life under extreme circumstances. With a gun probably, at a…
Do you primarily work with invalids or children? Heck, even children can kill, but it usually requires working together. I was reading the other day about a group of under 10yos that buried alive another kid in a village because he looked weird.
Of everyone person I've ever met between the ages of 16 and 60, I'd say 99% are physically capable of killing somebody - you only need to push someone at the right time to have them fall to their death. Frail old woman have killed babies by covering their faces. There are poisonings.
Do guns make it easier or more accessible? Absolutely. Can a 95 lbs woman physically take on a 250 lbs man? Not likely in a 1:1 fight, but I met one who killed her husband with a knife.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It’s much easier to bomb a family’s home. Okay, how is this not a war crime? There are ~2M civilians who live in Gaza, and many of them don't have access to food, water, medicine, or safe shelter. Some of those unfortunates live above, or below, Hamas operatives and their families. "Oh, sorry, lol." "It was unintentional, lmao, seriously." "Our doctrine states that we can kill X civilians for every hostile operativ…
The war in Gaza is unlike Ukraine because Hamas does not issue uniforms or clearly demarcate military targets. When the US was in Afghanistan, Al Qaeda learned that the US (generally) won't shoot ambulances. So what became the most valuable vehicle to Al Qaeda? Hamas took notes, but Israel doesn't seem to care as much as the US. Also, besides all that, once something is used for military operations, it is fair game a…
This is not true you can just google Qassam brigade to see their uniform, they have a very emblematic headband. They are hiding in tunnels though so you're not just gonna find them everywhere, Hamas does not have military equipment to be able to fight head to head with a modern military, it's just an insurgent group.
> once something is used for military operations, it is fair game as a military target.
Except you have to prove it was used for military operations, not just bomb hospitals. This is called a war crime.
> Regardless of civilians
well well
Apart from all the horribleness and knowingly mudering civilians the idea of a 9to5 soldier that performs military activity then goes home to his family, well within range of weapons and intelligence of the enemy and expecting he and his family will be safe there while he sleeps is a bit insane. I can't imagine any army hellbent on winning fast would pass up on that opportunity. USA didn't exactly have much stricter…
[flagged]