Live data from Hacker News

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

972mag.com

961–970 of 1001 posts

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

#961

This shouldn't be flagged.

Given how gang-flagging as a form of censorship became prevalent here on HN I think they should consider removing flagging functionality for submissions entirely. It should of course stay for comments but posts typically get flagged for political reasons and nothing else.

[deleted]

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

#962
post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disturbing indeed. I've been worried a push back in AI is coming and this sort of story could be a tipping point and certainly would justify a period of reflection. And your probably right that the alternatives maybe worse, the folks behind Lavender could probably even prove it with data.. but there should be a moral impetus to always have a human in the loop regardless. And any such attempt to justify it won't captu…

there should be a moral impetus to always have a human in the loop regardless I don’t understand how to come to this. War is crap, not a dinner party. There’s always a human on both sides who will drop a bomb and laugh on camera, with no responsibility. Go watch it (actually don’t, it’s NSFL). Reading this thread feels like everyone watched and believed in that movie where they tried to select and eliminate a target…

There's an old IBM presentation going around, from 1979, that says "A computer can never be held accountable, therefore a computer must never make a Management Decision." We know that humans make monstrous decisions in war; many of us remember seeing the Collateral Murder video, and everyone has at least heard of the Nuremberg trials. When humans make monstrous decisions, at least some of them, sometimes, hang for it. The computer here serves mainly to diffuse responsibility for decisions that would be made in any case. Who will hang?

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

#963

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 always starts with making a list of targets that meet given criteria. Once you have the list its use changes from categorisation to demonisation -> surveillance -> denial of rights -> deportations -> killing. Early use of computers by Germans during WW2 included making and processing of lists of people who ought to be sent to concentration camps. The only difference today is that we are able to capture more data a…

One of the reasons for the adoption of the Hollerith Tabulator in the great 1890 Census - arguably the birth of computing in the United States - was the increasing concern about . . let's say ethnics. To be frank, there were too many of them. "Japanese," "Chinese," "Negro," "mulatto," "quadroon," "octoroon," "negrito", etc etc. So in 1890, we needed dozens of new categories, and the old methods simply would not work. At least in terms of usable - actionable[1] - data in a quantitative setting.

Its success was so marked that it was immediately decided in 1893 to move a Tabulator to Ellis Island, to count the ethnics from the source with Hollerith's new technology. Herman Hollerith had great success in his own lifetime, the technology eventually becoming the core of the Computing-Tabulating-Recording Company, otherwise known, a decade later, as International Business Machines.

The establishment of this clear process surrounding race - actual race law - was, believe it or not, pretty novel in Western history. A lot of old-timey race policy - like the relationship between a monarch and the Jews, or what exactly a visiting Muslim could or couldn't do (like sell and buy slaves cough Venice cough) - this race stuff was almost always very, ah, what we'd call "tribal knowledge". A Jew in the Middle Ages could have far greater rights and lifestyle than in later periods, but those rights were completely unpredictable; this was true to greater or lesser extent for many "outsiders" in the early European era. Even in 1900 American innovation in race law - based on "Science!" - was a new thing, and extremely exciting to the enthusiasts of folk movements[2] crisscrossing our entire civilization[3] at the time. One of those was Willy Heidinger, who established Deutsche Hollerith Maschinen Gesellschaft to produce license-built Hollerith machines. World events interceded, however, and the German civil service infrastructure to run a census would not be present until much later . . 1933, in fact, when things would get very spicy indeed in the world of race "science".

And then, of course, cataclysm: the end of the European Order.

On the European continent, a debt to truth was paid. A hundred million dead or maimed, nations wrecked, a whole world - a weltanschauung - burnt down to the foundations - below the foundations. But elsewhere - like in the New World - the lesson was not as stark. And in yet other places the inverse lesson was learned: once you determine a person is not a person, you must brutalize yourself and your population immediately, before the soon-to-be-unpeople realizes that the struggle is existential.

Let's wrap this up.

What 20th century Race Science/Race Law were trying to do was make sense of something as complicated as human culture but using the sciences they understood: 19th century statistics, the physics of iron and steam. Those were the sciences with the capital backing, so - of course! - those were the only science that mattered. Today, we're looking at another complex element of the human experience - human language, human consciousness - and again, we're looking at it through the science that's got the most capital backing it: computation. That's how "text" somehow, incredibly, came to contain "language". Or how "scarcity" was represented by "money" - as if there were any N-dimensional descriptions that could adequately vectorize either of those concepts.

Ultimately, when you really dig yourself into these sorts of artificial - if not downright dishonest - "science-y" establishments, when you start imposing them on the world, you don't break out of them easily. Or without damage. The people making use of your LLM widget do not understand the math - all they know, like the race science of previous centuries - is that it's Science-y. It might as well be wearing a Mitre and Crosier.

[1] What those actions were, is a subject for another post. Probably inside a soon-to-be-flagged topic.

[2] The American example in race law was also very exciting to a certain Mr. Adolf Hitler, as well. You can read all about it in Mein Kampf. Hitler's attitude towards America is really fascinating stuff, but an entirely other subject.

[3] And beyond! Ethnonationalism spread like fire, as colonized peoples realized this could be their big ticket towards peerage in the European age.

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

#964

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which war crime was committed? https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/war-crimes.shtml

At least a dozen counts of Article 8 2.b. Only allowing 20 seconds to verify that you are male (nothing else). Intentional night bombings to increase the chance of hitting your target, but ignoring that you're hitting a residential, killing a target's family and neighbours by association. Programming in a allowable "10% error rate", which looks more like a success rate when you factor in collateral. These aren't acce…

There are 26 different acts under Article 8 2.b., which specifically?

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

#965

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…

Dresden rules should be applied to Gaza. Israel is way too considerate with Lavender. Every other house in Gaza is full of weapons.

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

#966

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By the standards discussed in the article, anyone with a beef with Israel could justify targeting possible a majority of buildings in Israel. After all, most of the population is required to serve in the IDF.

Both Hamas and Hezbollah are routinely doing exactly that.

Are they trying to legally or morally justify those attacks?

Last year I would have said that Israel was reasonably well behaved and Hezbollah and Hamas’s rockets fired into Israel were utterly unjustifiable terrorism and served no valid military purpose.

It seems like Israel is busily lowering itself it to its enemies’ level, and it’s not particularly clear that its attacks serve a legitimate military purpose to a much greater extent than Hamas and Hezbollah’s.

Compare to the US’s war in Afghanistan. Regardless of whether one believes that the war was a good idea or we’ll executed, at least the US seemed to be trying to make Afghanistan livable for its non-militant residents, and they perhaps even succeeded for a while.

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

#967
post #844

what prevents Lavender from being deployed in EU or US for targeting Hamas operatives abroad ? People would get assassinated randomly and nobody would know why

Israel can freely bomb the shit out of Gaza as much as they want because it's "other" people's blocks and homes being destroyed. Pretty sure the US blanket protection of Israeli war crimes would go away if apartment buildings in Philly started to get leveled as well.

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

#968
post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

9/11 killed 3k people

I don't have the full context of the thread here, but it sounds to me like you're saying '9/11' was at scale x, and therefore a benchmark is established for acceptable 'repercussion cost.'

If that's what you're saying, I guess I'd flag that the 'repercussion cost' for 9/11 is still very much open to debate, and there is significant data to point towards almost every step the US took as a reaction to 9/11 being problematic, ranging from who was targeted, what the collateral impact was, and whether it actually solved any of the underlying problems.

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

#969
post #638

I expected more comments on the source’s biases, given the contentious and sensitive topic; journalist Liel Leibovitz writes this about +972 Magazine (1): > Underlining everything +972 does is a dedication to promoting a progressive worldview of Israeli politics, advocating an end to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, and protecting human and civil rights in Israel and Palestine. > And while the magazine’s repo…

> I expected more comments on the source’s biases,

Are ad-hominems generally acceptable here?

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

#970
post #21

I know many people won't read past the headline, but please try to. This is the second paragraph: "In addition to talking about their use of the AI system, called Lavender, the intelligence sources claim that Israeli military officials permitted large numbers of Palestinian civilians to be killed, particularly during the early weeks and months of the conflict."

Well yeah, they have an “unspoken” 10 to 1 rule about taking 10 Palestinian lives for each Israeli loss.
Post reply on HN