4 ms·

"Luckily there are physical limitations.... I'm less worried about government doing bad shit and more worried about private citizens getting nasty." The MSF Tr

"Luckily there are physical limitations.... I'm less worried about government doing bad shit and more worried about private citizens getting nasty." The MSF Trauma Hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan (3rd October) didn't have this luxury and in the fog of war, [0] 12 MSF medical staff and ten patients were killed. [1],[2] Killing by remote sensing, is indiscriminate. Adding AI is another order of stupidity. References: [0] http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/11/how-tech-fails-led-to-air-force-strike-on-msfs-kunduz-hospital/ http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2015/11/how-te... [1] http://www.msf.org.uk/article/in-memoriam-msf-colleagues-killed-in-the-kunduz-trauma-centre-attack http://www.msf.org.uk/article/in-memoriam-msf-colleagues-kil... [2] http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/06/doctors-without-borders-airstrike-afghanistan-us-account-changes-again http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/06/doctors-witho...

iofj 11y ago
AI can probably actually improve this particular incident. Having a "rocket" that doesn't explode but drops an AI controlled drone that kills (or even just disables) exactly who is targeted seems like it would be far superior from both the military perspective and the moral perspective. This sort of thing: https://youtu.be/DTqa-NEwUbs?t=94 https://youtu.be/DTqa-NEwUbs?t=94 It could even drop "phone home" over radio, allow the operators to point out the targets at that point, and then fire.
- wavefunction 11y ago
  We've been hearing about "smart weapons" since the early 90s and they don't seem to be getting any more intelligent as time has gone on.
sailfast 11y ago
Not sure that it matters for the sake of argument, but the weapon system used in question was a human-piloted, human-manned AC-130 gunship, not a drone / remote platform
- bootload 11y ago
  "the weapon system used in question was a human-piloted, human-manned AC-130 gunship" True, read the Ars article: "The BMC crew is responsible for steering the aircraft to targets, identifying them, and shooting them; the aircraft's battery is slaved to the sensor suite for targeting." - Aircrew, well trained, professional. As ethical as you can get. Now what happened is "A US special operations team on the ground, given coordinates of the Afghani NDS building by the Afghan forces they were working with, passed them to the AC-130. But when the AC-130 crew punched the grid coordinates into their targeting system, it aimed at an open field 300 meters away from the actual target. Working from a rough description of the building provided from the ground, the sensor operators found a building close to the field that they believed was the target. Tragically, it was actually the hospital." Will adding AI to this situation make any improvement when the real issue is ' lack of a "common operating picture,"'?
  - sailfast 11y ago
    No, you're right. The only thing that may have happened was lack of connectivity to COP and no person in the loop to authorize, resulting in a stand-down of operation and no ordnance on target. Great if it's a hospital, not so great if it's actually a bunch of enemy that you need to remove to save your soldiers on the ground. Tough, tough thing to get right all the time. I think a measured, hybrid approach will probably get you the best outcome but I'm no expert in this field.
    - bootload 11y ago
      just gets muddier and muddier ~ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/12/11/months-after-the-airstrike-on-msfs-hospital-in-kunduz-what-exactly-happened-is-still-unclear/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/12/11...
      - sailfast 11y ago
        Total aside, but the United States should really promote some sort of beacon / FLIR-readable indicator for hospitals. Their existence would have to be kept a quiet so there weren't a bunch of false positives floating around, but I would think the cost is minimal for the returned value.
vlehto 11y ago
Governments already have their AI killer robots. It's called "military personnel" and "policemen". The increase of government lethality towards regular people should be somewhat minimal compared to current tech. This has to be controlled politically, hence democracy. But governments could greatly increase their capability for surveillance.
peteretep 11y ago
> Adding AI is another order > of stupidity. That is predicated on the assumption that AI would make worse decisions than humans, which I'm really not sure is a given.

iofj 11y ago

AI can probably actually improve this particular incident. Having a "rocket" that doesn't explode but drops an AI controlled drone that kills (or even just disables) exactly who is targeted seems like it would be far superior from both the military perspective and the moral perspective. This sort of thing: https://youtu.be/DTqa-NEwUbs?t=94 https://youtu.be/DTqa-NEwUbs?t=94 It could even drop "phone home" over radio, allow the operators to point out the targets at that point, and then fire.

wavefunction 11y ago
We've been hearing about "smart weapons" since the early 90s and they don't seem to be getting any more intelligent as time has gone on.

sailfast 11y ago

Not sure that it matters for the sake of argument, but the weapon system used in question was a human-piloted, human-manned AC-130 gunship, not a drone / remote platform

bootload 11y ago
"the weapon system used in question was a human-piloted, human-manned AC-130 gunship" True, read the Ars article: "The BMC crew is responsible for steering the aircraft to targets, identifying them, and shooting them; the aircraft's battery is slaved to the sensor suite for targeting." - Aircrew, well trained, professional. As ethical as you can get. Now what happened is "A US special operations team on the ground, given coordinates of the Afghani NDS building by the Afghan forces they were working with, passed them to the AC-130. But when the AC-130 crew punched the grid coordinates into their targeting system, it aimed at an open field 300 meters away from the actual target. Working from a rough description of the building provided from the ground, the sensor operators found a building close to the field that they believed was the target. Tragically, it was actually the hospital." Will adding AI to this situation make any improvement when the real issue is ' lack of a "common operating picture,"'?
- sailfast 11y ago
  No, you're right. The only thing that may have happened was lack of connectivity to COP and no person in the loop to authorize, resulting in a stand-down of operation and no ordnance on target. Great if it's a hospital, not so great if it's actually a bunch of enemy that you need to remove to save your soldiers on the ground. Tough, tough thing to get right all the time. I think a measured, hybrid approach will probably get you the best outcome but I'm no expert in this field.
  - bootload 11y ago
    just gets muddier and muddier ~ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/12/11/months-after-the-airstrike-on-msfs-hospital-in-kunduz-what-exactly-happened-is-still-unclear/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2015/12/11...
    - sailfast 11y ago
      Total aside, but the United States should really promote some sort of beacon / FLIR-readable indicator for hospitals. Their existence would have to be kept a quiet so there weren't a bunch of false positives floating around, but I would think the cost is minimal for the returned value.

vlehto 11y ago

Governments already have their AI killer robots. It's called "military personnel" and "policemen". The increase of government lethality towards regular people should be somewhat minimal compared to current tech. This has to be controlled politically, hence democracy. But governments could greatly increase their capability for surveillance.

peteretep 11y ago

> Adding AI is another order > of stupidity. That is predicated on the assumption that AI would make worse decisions than humans, which I'm really not sure is a given.