Furthermore, even if the algorithm was generating kill lists directly there seems to be the implicit assumption that that would be worse than having some human

Furthermore, even if the algorithm was generating kill lists directly there seems to be the implicit assumption that that would be worse than having some human "yes-men" who are directly beholden to orders of their immediate superiors and surely care more about their career advancement than bombing random Pakistanis in charge of the process. It's the same fallacy as being overly paranoid about the safety of self-driving vehicles, the system doesn't need to be perfect, it just needs to suck less than what it replaced, how did the CIA/NSA come up with such lists before the advent of computer analysis?