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

Post by Thiez » Wed, Apr 03, 2024, 9:31 PM UTC

mschuster91 wrote: post #610

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…

> Only those who have the "continuous function" to "directly participate in hostilities"[1] may be targeted for attack at any time. The problem with Hamas is that they don't shy away from hiding combattants in civilian clothings or use women and children as suicide bombers. There is more than enough evidence of this tactic, dating back many many years [1]. By not just not preventing, but actively ordering such war cr…

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Apr 03, 2024, 9:32 PM UTC

digging wrote: post #451

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…

> What is the "zero-error" alternative approach for dropping bombs in a war, or firing rockets for that matter? Honestly, I'm not sure. Obviously humans make errors of all sorts as well, and even make intentionally unethical decisions. I think the horror of this situation is that it makes war easier to wage. Accepting that all war has costs measured in blood, we should want less war. However, those in control of mili…

Post by mschuster91 » Wed, Apr 03, 2024, 9:33 PM UTC

colordrops wrote: post #619

mschuster91 wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only those who have the "continuous function" to "directly participate in hostilities"[1] may be targeted for attack at any time. The problem with Hamas is that they don't shy away from hiding combattants in civilian clothings or use women and children as suicide bombers. There is more than enough evidence of this tactic, dating back many many years [1]. By not just not preventing, but actively ordering such war cr…

> Hamas leadership has stripped its civilian population of the protections of international law. You completely lose any credibility with this statement. Civilians can't be "stripped" of protections of international law.

Post by cpcat » Wed, Apr 03, 2024, 9:36 PM UTC

Post by amenhotep » Wed, Apr 03, 2024, 9:38 PM UTC

readyplayeremma wrote: post #371

sequoia wrote: post #362

I'm disturbed by the idea that an AI could be used to make decisions that could proactively kill someone. (Presumably computer already make decisions that passively kill people by, for example, navigating a self-driving car.) Though there was a human sign-off in this case, it seems one step away from people being killed by robots with zero human intervention which is about one step away from the plot of Terminator. I…

> B., a senior officer who used Lavender, echoed to +972 and Local Call that in the current war, officers were not required to independently review the AI system’s assessments, in order to save time and enable the mass production of human targets without hindrances. > “Everything was statistical, everything was neat — it was very dry,” B. said. He noted that this lack of supervision was permitted despite internal che…