6 ms·

Drones can be, and have been jammed, or even captured [1]. You need now, and will continue to need for the foreseeable future pilots in planes. But teams of pil

Drones can be, and have been jammed, or even captured [1]. You need now, and will continue to need for the foreseeable future pilots in planes. But teams of piloted fighters and drones? That will be the winning combination. And how can a single human command a flock of 20 aircraft? By giving short orders, and letting AI taking care of the rest. The ethics of killing will never be left to AI, but the technicalities of acquiring and prosecuting the target? You bet. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93U.S._RQ-170_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93U.S._RQ-170_incid...

fastball 6y ago
Aren't current drones mostly remote-controlled? In this case the AI is onboard, right? So much lower surface area for being hacked.
- hammock 6y ago
  Goodness. Are you suggesting AI-powered flying killing machines that we can't supervise or control remotely (even temporarily due to jamming) are ok?
  - ummonk 6y ago
    They’re called cruise missiles.
    - hammock 6y ago
      Touche
awb 6y ago
> The ethics of killing will never be left to AI I hope you're right, but what makes you so sure? In a wartime scenario, if a country is short on skilled personnel why wouldn't they release AI combatants if they had the tech? Especially if they're facing a perceived aggressor or defending their territory.
- supportlocal4h 6y ago
  You're hoping against something that is already historical fact. Do you mean that you hope it will no longer be true in the future?
  - awb 6y ago
    If AI has made a decision to kill without human approval, I haven't heard about it. Do you have references I could look at?
lurquer 6y ago
> The ethics of killing will never be left to AI, Ha. I know of a device with a very simple AI program that can tell if an enemy is standing on it. If so, the enemy is killed. It’s called a mine. They have been used in every land (and naval) war since they were invented.
- ekianjo 6y ago
  I don't think mines quality as "AI", unless you stretch the definition to just mean anything under the sun.
  - conception 6y ago
    I think they just meant that the military long left the “kill/don’t kill” decision along the wayside despite the propaganda of saying we have someone in control of the kill vector.
    - ekianjo 6y ago
      The whole discussion was about AI as far as I can recall.
      - Dylan16807 6y ago
        Mines are being compared as something that makes worse decisions but gets put in charge anyway.
    - krustyburger 6y ago
      I think you’re right and I wish they would have just said that. It’s a good point.
  - leafboi 6y ago
    But AI's can qualify as mines. Sending out AI drones is like deploying mines that kill anything within a certain radius.
StanislavPetrov 6y ago
>The ethics of killing will never be left to AI, but the technicalities of acquiring and prosecuting the target? This is unfortunately completely wrong. Fully autonomous weapons have already deployed for years, and are currently in use on the North/South Korean border. Fully autonomous weapons systems, including drones that use AI to autonomously choose and destroy their targets have been under development for many years. https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2017/07/28/autonomous-military-drones-no-longer-science-fiction/index.html https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2017/07/28/autonom... There's a reason experts are sounding the alarm - because the ethics of killing are being shifted to AI right now. >Kallenborn, an expert in unmanned systems and WMD, describes one type of swarm that he calls an Armed, Fully-Autonomous Drone Swarm, or AFADS. Once unleashed an AFADS will locate, identify, and attack targets without human intervention https://mwi.usma.edu/swarms-mass-destruction-case-declaring-armed-fully-autonomous-drone-swarms-wmd/ https://mwi.usma.edu/swarms-mass-destruction-case-declaring-...
zamalek 6y ago
Keep in mind that electronically jamming a modern fighter is effectively downing it, irrespective of the human inside. I have read that are beyond the ability of a human to fly directly, and absolutely require fly-by-wire to stay aloft. As for taking control of an AI drone, you can eliminate that possibility by only allowing abort orders remotely. Classical drones still require a remote human. This is a different league.
- jki275 6y ago
  "electronically jamming a modern fighter" isn't going to do anything to its flight controls. You're correct that flight computers are generally required to keep dynamically unstable aircraft flying -- but that's done at a much lower level than anything that's connected to a radio.
maeln 6y ago
> The ethics of killing will never be left to AI, but the technicalities of acquiring and prosecuting the target? Other have already answered this, but I want to chip in with my own experience working for a submarine and military boat manufacturer + talking to navy officer. They already have system to acquire and try to distinguish friend of foe. The only reason why the system is not pushing the launch button by itself is because there is a lot of tactic involved in starting an engagement. Especially for submarines who might prefer to remain hidden than launch a torpedo which will uncover its position. Also, those system are not perfect, one navy officer who was on radar duty told me that he activated the alarm on his ship after seeing something on the radar that ended up being a flock of seagull. If the system was able to manage tactic and be able to distinguish friend of foe reliably, they would give it the power to kill.
tim333 6y ago
The ethics of killing is really down to the politicians / leaders whether the end job is done by a human or a machine.

fastball 6y ago

Aren't current drones mostly remote-controlled? In this case the AI is onboard, right? So much lower surface area for being hacked.

hammock 6y ago
Goodness. Are you suggesting AI-powered flying killing machines that we can't supervise or control remotely (even temporarily due to jamming) are ok?
- ummonk 6y ago
  They’re called cruise missiles.
  - hammock 6y ago
    Touche

awb 6y ago

> The ethics of killing will never be left to AI I hope you're right, but what makes you so sure? In a wartime scenario, if a country is short on skilled personnel why wouldn't they release AI combatants if they had the tech? Especially if they're facing a perceived aggressor or defending their territory.

supportlocal4h 6y ago
You're hoping against something that is already historical fact. Do you mean that you hope it will no longer be true in the future?
- awb 6y ago
  If AI has made a decision to kill without human approval, I haven't heard about it. Do you have references I could look at?

lurquer 6y ago

> The ethics of killing will never be left to AI, Ha. I know of a device with a very simple AI program that can tell if an enemy is standing on it. If so, the enemy is killed. It’s called a mine. They have been used in every land (and naval) war since they were invented.

ekianjo 6y ago
I don't think mines quality as "AI", unless you stretch the definition to just mean anything under the sun.
- conception 6y ago
  I think they just meant that the military long left the “kill/don’t kill” decision along the wayside despite the propaganda of saying we have someone in control of the kill vector.
  - ekianjo 6y ago
    The whole discussion was about AI as far as I can recall.
    - Dylan16807 6y ago
      Mines are being compared as something that makes worse decisions but gets put in charge anyway.
  - krustyburger 6y ago
    I think you’re right and I wish they would have just said that. It’s a good point.
- leafboi 6y ago
  But AI's can qualify as mines. Sending out AI drones is like deploying mines that kill anything within a certain radius.

StanislavPetrov 6y ago

>The ethics of killing will never be left to AI, but the technicalities of acquiring and prosecuting the target? This is unfortunately completely wrong. Fully autonomous weapons have already deployed for years, and are currently in use on the North/South Korean border. Fully autonomous weapons systems, including drones that use AI to autonomously choose and destroy their targets have been under development for many years. https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2017/07/28/autonomous-military-drones-no-longer-science-fiction/index.html https://www.nato.int/docu/review/articles/2017/07/28/autonom... There's a reason experts are sounding the alarm - because the ethics of killing are being shifted to AI right now. >Kallenborn, an expert in unmanned systems and WMD, describes one type of swarm that he calls an Armed, Fully-Autonomous Drone Swarm, or AFADS. Once unleashed an AFADS will locate, identify, and attack targets without human intervention https://mwi.usma.edu/swarms-mass-destruction-case-declaring-armed-fully-autonomous-drone-swarms-wmd/ https://mwi.usma.edu/swarms-mass-destruction-case-declaring-...

zamalek 6y ago

Keep in mind that electronically jamming a modern fighter is effectively downing it, irrespective of the human inside. I have read that are beyond the ability of a human to fly directly, and absolutely require fly-by-wire to stay aloft. As for taking control of an AI drone, you can eliminate that possibility by only allowing abort orders remotely. Classical drones still require a remote human. This is a different league.

jki275 6y ago
"electronically jamming a modern fighter" isn't going to do anything to its flight controls. You're correct that flight computers are generally required to keep dynamically unstable aircraft flying -- but that's done at a much lower level than anything that's connected to a radio.

maeln 6y ago

> The ethics of killing will never be left to AI, but the technicalities of acquiring and prosecuting the target? Other have already answered this, but I want to chip in with my own experience working for a submarine and military boat manufacturer + talking to navy officer. They already have system to acquire and try to distinguish friend of foe. The only reason why the system is not pushing the launch button by itself is because there is a lot of tactic involved in starting an engagement. Especially for submarines who might prefer to remain hidden than launch a torpedo which will uncover its position. Also, those system are not perfect, one navy officer who was on radar duty told me that he activated the alarm on his ship after seeing something on the radar that ended up being a flock of seagull. If the system was able to manage tactic and be able to distinguish friend of foe reliably, they would give it the power to kill.

tim333 6y ago

The ethics of killing is really down to the politicians / leaders whether the end job is done by a human or a machine.