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

A dozen Google employees quit over military drone project

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: A dozen Google employees quit over military drone project

#61

Post by facetube »

posix_me_less wrote: post #45
grcshlep wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm thinking that they have a problem with the military, period, and don't think soldiers should have been in Iraq etc in the first place. Its an issue of trust. And then you have the argument that if you reduce the human cost of wars, you make wars more likely.

> the argument that if you reduce the human cost of wars, you make wars more likely Very good point! Drone attacks make the operators into drones themselves, detached from feeling the consequences of their actions.

It's not clear that cost is even being reduced. PTSD rates in drone operators are roughly equivalent to those who fly manned combat missions [1].

https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/23/us/drone-pilots-found-to-...

Re: A dozen Google employees quit over military drone project

#62

Post by Doctor_Fegg »

raverbashing wrote: post #43
Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. “Click on the images containing a crosswalk.” I’m British. That’s not a word we use.

I don't see what's so hard about it. Captcha descriptions are also localized but I understand why they wouldn't do US UK.

What's hard is that 90% of UK residents won't understand what they're being asked to do.

Re: A dozen Google employees quit over military drone project

#63

Post by raverbashing »

Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #62
raverbashing wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see what's so hard about it. Captcha descriptions are also localized but I understand why they wouldn't do US UK.

What's hard is that 90% of UK residents won't understand what they're being asked to do.

Yes because "crosswalk" is an opaque word that doesn't have an obvious meaning (and not present in commonly consumed media from the US).

While there is some potential for confusion, I don't think that stands for that specific word.

Re: A dozen Google employees quit over military drone project

#64

Post by tejasmanohar »

RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote: post #31
davesque wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's an argument. The truth is, even if the particular applications of AI to tasks like this are innocuous in this case, they're less than a stone's throw away from things that aren't. Uses like this for technology are a perfect example of things we (we, the tech community, who have always prided ourselves on being more fair and ethical than the rest of the world) all promised we would never do . Ther…

Are you also against end-to-end encrypted messaging? Telegram is used extensively by ISIS - who does actual evil and deliberately targets civilians.

Frankly, I’m still sifting through the arguments here and don’t think I agree with the OP off the bat, but that’s a false analogy. Google’s work is directly advertised for military use— Telegram isn’t. I don’t think anyone is arguing against object detection research, more its military application.

Re: A dozen Google employees quit over military drone project

#65

Post by travmatt »

mratzloff wrote: post #17
manfredo wrote: post #12

> "If ethical action on the part of tech companies requires consideration of who might benefit from a technology and who might be harmed," the letter reads, "we can say with certainty that no topic deserves more sober reflection—no technology has higher stakes—than algorithms meant to target and kill at a distance and without public accountability,” My understanding from the reading I've done is that this project is…

Once Google engineers have trained an algorithm to interpret a video feed to determine when people enter and exit buildings, what do you think the very next step is? It will be applied to live video for use in determining where a target is located in order to kill him.

Sometimes I’m convinced that hn’ers are just trying to argue the contrarian point of view, irregardless of facts.

Thats certainly easier for me to believe than someone who sincerely thinks that military spending millions of dollars on targeting systems doesn’t mean the military is planning on using targeting systems it spent millions of dollars to develop.

Re: A dozen Google employees quit over military drone project

#66

Post by justinclift »

raverbashing wrote: post #63
Doctor_Fegg wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's hard is that 90% of UK residents won't understand what they're being asked to do.

Yes because "crosswalk" is an opaque word that doesn't have an obvious meaning (and not present in commonly consumed media from the US). While there is some potential for confusion, I don't think that stands for that specific word.

It's where two footpaths cross each other? :)

Re: A dozen Google employees quit over military drone project

#67

Post by debt »

DINKDINK wrote: post #11
debt wrote: post #6

I'm staunchly opposed to war, but understand it's unfortunate necessity under certain extreme circumstances. If these types of projects make war machines more precise overall, they may actually decrease overall collateral damage and reduce the total time war is waged which could cause less lives to be lost during war. Until us humans can collectively overcome the various problems that cause war, might be worth it for…

Your argument is: "By making war more efficient/effective, we will reduce its use." Say a government only has nuclear bombs in its arsenal and they really want an enemy of the state dead. Do you think they're willing to nuke an entire city to kill one person? Now imagine a government has electronic kill switches. Imagine it being almost like The Matrix, they can just flip your life off at the flick of a button. Do yo…

My argument is that more precise war machines might cause less collateral death thus resulting in less overall casualties from conflict.

Unfortunately, historically speaking, the use of war is assured.

Re: A dozen Google employees quit over military drone project

#68

Post by spraak »

pluto9 wrote: post #55
spraak wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just mean that if you're opposed to something then there aren't any times it's also a necessity. You may do it, but ultimately you view it as unnecessary. War happens, but it's unnecessary every time, even when one side initiates, it doesn't make it necessary.

It's necessary for you when the other side has decided to engage in it against you. The fact that it was technically "unnecessary" for them to start the war in the first place is rather irrelevant when they're marching down your street. The decision about whether there's going to be a war, necessary or not, has been made for you. If you don't believe me, I'm sure there's a Kurd somewhere who would be amused to hear y…

You're still missing my view point. It's always unnecessary, whether you engage or not.

Re: A dozen Google employees quit over military drone project

#69

Post by pluto9 »

spraak wrote: post #68
pluto9 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's necessary for you when the other side has decided to engage in it against you. The fact that it was technically "unnecessary" for them to start the war in the first place is rather irrelevant when they're marching down your street. The decision about whether there's going to be a war, necessary or not, has been made for you. If you don't believe me, I'm sure there's a Kurd somewhere who would be amused to hear y…

You're still missing my view point. It's always unnecessary, whether you engage or not.

I understand your point perfectly. My point is that that's only true by the most literal, pedantic, and irrelevant definition of "unnecessary".

Re: A dozen Google employees quit over military drone project

#70

Post by davesque »

eggy wrote: post #57
davesque wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think that's an argument. The truth is, even if the particular applications of AI to tasks like this are innocuous in this case, they're less than a stone's throw away from things that aren't. Uses like this for technology are a perfect example of things we (we, the tech community, who have always prided ourselves on being more fair and ethical than the rest of the world) all promised we would never do . Ther…

I was following your argument until the parenthetical elitist remark about the tech community priding themselves "on being more fair and ethical than the rest of the world". Is this a truly held belief common in the tech community? Glad I don't subscribe myself to groupthink. The tech community seems to fill the news with sexual harassment and other unethical actions just as much as any other self-defined group.

The statement was meant to be slightly ironic.
Post reply on HN