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

I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 491 posts

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#311

Post by ItendToDisagree »

ars_technician wrote: post #297
Helianthus wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno, I thought it worked pretty well. Prim posturing, however, I find bland.

Sarcasm is a tool for someone that can't actually come up with a counter-argument. It's an appeal to absurdity combined with a strawman. Exaggerate the other side's point until it sounds ridiculous and pretend that's an argument.

Sometimes the ridiculousness of the opposition's argument is more compelling to the majority of people than saying "You've committed fallacy A, B, C, D, & F." Especially when the 'argument' in question actually isn't even an argument.

"Opinion piece is misleading because it isn't a factual non-biased piece of journalism" seems like one of these times.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#312

Post by pygy_ »

neals wrote: post #301
pygy_ wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In reply to your edit to the parent post: robots won't take over for us. If they are ever in such a position of power, they'll get rid of us. I'm not exactly looking forwards to it. Among other things, human history is the combined evolution of sociological and technological progress. Societal progress has peaked a while ago. Technology has been riding the curiosity and mental ability of the most brilliant among us,…

None of this is based on facts or study. I like the fiction you present though.

It is completely factual. Look at life and human history from an information theoretic point of view.

DNA for long term storage, cell to cell communication culminating in multicellular organisms, nervous systems and memory, symbolic communication and information transmission through conversations. Writing, printing, telegraphs; computers, networked.

Technology is a self-amplifying meme, and, now that there are technological means to transmit, persist and process complex information outside of human brains, we are no longer necessary to perpetuate it.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#313

Post by drone »

TruthElixirX wrote: post #254
jusben1369 wrote: post #112

We need to make sure we're not being manipulated. Here the Guardian is just serving up an emotional, unsubstantiated, one sided view of this discussion. I'm not sure how this is different to much of the chest beating I'd see on Fox News. I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Just that if we pride ourselves on being educated and critical thinkers that we apply that to all sources of data we read. We all kno…

You're a sack of shit: >I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Congrats on being a mediocre person who doesn't believe in anything or have any opinions. This is the most offensive thing I think, even more than me disagreeing with you. Just picking middle of the road bland boring contrariness. >We all know war is hell. Apparently "we" don't because people continue to wage war. >We know using weapons to attac…

Unfortunately, you may have had a point, but the abusive and offensive way about which you've made it makes it nearly impossible to discern it. Your comment is exactly why I stopped reading comments on news papers, it is full of ad hominem attacks with a serious vileness that makes it clear you are neither interested in discussion of the subject nor capable of providing meaningful insight.

I agree with the other poster, political posts bring out the partisans and assholes.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#314

Post by vagarwa »

jusben1369 wrote: post #112

We need to make sure we're not being manipulated. Here the Guardian is just serving up an emotional, unsubstantiated, one sided view of this discussion. I'm not sure how this is different to much of the chest beating I'd see on Fox News. I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Just that if we pride ourselves on being educated and critical thinkers that we apply that to all sources of data we read. We all kno…

'War' is a very specific term of the trade. Using any and all tools available when you are at War can be easily defended by a whole lot of people (not everyone0. US is not officially at war in Yemen or Pakistan or for that matter Afghanistan. Hence, I think, use of drones introduces another dimension to the arguments. Ultimately, there is and always has been one principle used by humanity - 'Might is right'. Of-course smart ones can always hide this core principle in layers of arguments of convenience.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#315

Post by davidy123 »

jusben1369 wrote: post #112

We need to make sure we're not being manipulated. Here the Guardian is just serving up an emotional, unsubstantiated, one sided view of this discussion. I'm not sure how this is different to much of the chest beating I'd see on Fox News. I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Just that if we pride ourselves on being educated and critical thinkers that we apply that to all sources of data we read. We all kno…

You make some good points. The evaluation of drones should be reasoned and open. How about suspending their use until then?

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#316

Post by jusben1369 »

mark_l_watson wrote: post #244
jusben1369 wrote: post #112

We need to make sure we're not being manipulated. Here the Guardian is just serving up an emotional, unsubstantiated, one sided view of this discussion. I'm not sure how this is different to much of the chest beating I'd see on Fox News. I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Just that if we pride ourselves on being educated and critical thinkers that we apply that to all sources of data we read. We all kno…

Unbelievable that you seem to have such a hard calloused view of civilian casualties. Curious: what do you do for a living? The lies of omission by the US government in reporting any data on civilian casualties tells the real story, in my opinion. Drones are probably the sickest manifestation of the US Department of War. I used to be a defense contractor a few decades ago and was mostly proud of what I did, but what…

Hi Mark. I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that I have a calloused view towards civilian casualties? I'm really confused by drones. In one camp you could argue that without them there would be a much greater loss of life and more horrors of war. We would still be going after various members of the Taliban in the Afghanistan/Pakistan mountains only now it would be fighter jets and boots on the ground and therefore heavier casualties all round. On the other hand you could say that the ease with which we can now kill our enemies - without the critical downside of the death of our own troops (and the subsequent public opinion swing against war that then follows) has created too few disincentives and resulted in increased and unnecessary deaths. I'm not sure which it is! This headline grabbed me as perhaps by someone who could discuss the positives and negatives of how drones are really being used and I could draw some conclusions. Instead, as others have pointed out too, it offered very little in the way of substance about drones. Instead, it was a broad anti war piece with a lot of emotional imagery which spoke very little about drones and really didn't have any conclusion or point. So I felt like a bait and switch and that I was being lured by a misleading headline (Thus my manipulated theme)

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#317

Post by allochthon »

lemmsjid wrote: post #291
jusben1369 wrote: post #112

We need to make sure we're not being manipulated. Here the Guardian is just serving up an emotional, unsubstantiated, one sided view of this discussion. I'm not sure how this is different to much of the chest beating I'd see on Fox News. I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Just that if we pride ourselves on being educated and critical thinkers that we apply that to all sources of data we read. We all kno…

I try to put myself in the shoes of the potential drone targets. I live in Los Angeles, which seems to be the official city of the police helicopter (always followed closely by the news helicopter, because the possibility of violence is entertainment). Over the years it's gotten to the point where multiple times a week they're buzzing around the neighborhood, stabbing the backyard with their searchlights. I've never…

And as an American I do live with a particular type of fear, which is that of the DEA and SWAT team escalations.

I disagree that this is something to be all that worried about. It detracts from the rest of your argument.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#318

Post by yardie »

alexeisadeski3 wrote: post #274
TruthElixirX wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He isn't a sack of shit for having an opposing view point. He is a sack of shit for this middle ground all sides have a valid point and the truth is somewhere in the middle bullshit.

He actually doesn't take the middle ground. He's avoiding the drone vs anti-drone argument to make a perfectly valid and legitimate point about the Guardian article.

I read his response and he actually makes no point. Just reiterating "war is hell" twice.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#319

Post by abalone »

jusben1369 wrote: post #112

We need to make sure we're not being manipulated. Here the Guardian is just serving up an emotional, unsubstantiated, one sided view of this discussion. I'm not sure how this is different to much of the chest beating I'd see on Fox News. I'm not here to argue for or against the drones. Just that if we pride ourselves on being educated and critical thinkers that we apply that to all sources of data we read. We all kno…

It's a commentary. Commentaries are supposed to be one-sided.

The Guardian commentary appeals to emotion while making it clear where its sympathies lie. That is perfectly acceptable and proper for a commentary.

It's also quite relevant to the debate to bring emotion into it. You hinted at it when you asked whether "we're carrying out a lot more sorties than we did prior," but you only mentioned the military cost of it.

A key issue that the commentary highlights -- and perhaps the HN reactions to it as well -- is that we may be flying more drone sorties because the American populace is more comfortable with them.

It's a variant the old "smart bomb" argument from Desert Storm. If the U.S.'s only option was to carpet bomb Baghdad, then there probably would be more domestic opposition to the war and it may not even have happened. But the warmongers argued that we have smarter, more precise weaponry, which perhaps moderated opposition, leading to more horror and death.

Thus highlighting the actual horrors that drones inflict, and the widespread terror they instill in an entire population who live in constant fear they could be annihilated at any moment, is a very valid contribution to the debate.

Re: I worked on the US drone program. The public should know what really goes on

#320

Post by spiritplumber »

wetmore wrote: post #175
spiritplumber wrote: post #76

The public should also know that all this long range drone stuff can be done for cheap. Also, they pixelate the feed on purpose, to remove hesitation when hitting the trigger.

>Also, they pixelate the feed on purpose, to remove hesitation when hitting the trigger. Any proof for this?

No, it's something I heard from a guy doing UI design for this stuff. We were comparing notes / discussing what's the minimum resolution to pilot a remote vehicle.
Post reply on HN