Reply to post: Re: Sorry Cori, I respectfully disagree...

Engineers, coders – it's down to you to prevent AI being weaponised


Re: Sorry Cori, I respectfully disagree...

You spend your day shooting at soldiers and blowing them up with IEDs, then seek to complain when a drone takes out your house while you're having dinner?

Here's where the crux of your argument fails.

Back in Iraq, Coalition forces frequently came under mortar attack - i.e. indirect fire.

Frequently, they could spot someone (colloquially known as "a dicker") on a mobile phone or radio who was quite blatantly the spotter calling in the fire, but they were not authorised to engage because they were very deliberately NOT carrying a weapon and posed no direct/apparent threat to the troops.

They didn't need AI to do this, but fundamentally that's a signature behaviour. You're under fire, you can see one person with Line-of-Sight who is on a phone, it's probably them calling it in.

This was escalated and the ROE was changed so that someone who was part of a mortar team could be engaged irrespective of whether they personally were carrying a weapon.

Was that fraught with risk? Yes. Did you risk shooting some poor unarmed sod who was on the phone to their mum? Yes.

But the worst that happens is you shoot someone accidentally. That's quite bad, but it's better than following them home, dropping a 500lb bomb through their roof and killing their wife, children and extended family in the process.

When a drone lobs a bomb into a house (with - inevitably - a fuzzy number of occupants, with unknown identities), you risk enormous collateral damage.

When you industrialise collateral damage and make it accepted practice, you commit a war crime (except this isn't a conventional declared war, it's "counter-insurgency" so the USA likes to wash it's hands in the grey area, same as the non-POW "enemy combatants" in Gitmo).

Blowing up someone's family has nothing to do with your duty to your serviceman, or any Military Covenant. It's sloppy practice and - as others have pointed out - there's no duty to servicemen. Officially there are no ground forces in those locations. We're just flying in and bombing - proving the adage that a war cannot be won remotely. You need boots on the ground. And if there were boots on the ground (limited SF), then you'd fly in teams in helicopters (bypassing IEDS) for targeted snatch/kill missions.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019