4 ms·

Which leads you to wonder if casualty rate is a deterrent to firing rockets. What if it were different? Would that make an impact?

meowface 6y ago
That's a good point. It seems like unless there's not only a 100% counter-attack success rate but also a 100% missile detonation prevention rate, many/most of the attackers will believe that they'll be entering paradise soon anyway, so even a chance of killing civilians means they likely won't be deterred. It might deter some percentage, but considering how many people gladly accept certain death, an increased chance of death isn't a big hurdle.
- bsanr2 6y ago
  This unnecessarily others the people on that side of the conflict. They are desperate because their credible and civilized protests of apparent apartheid, let alone global recognition of their claim to sovereignty, are ignored.
  - meowface 6y ago
    You may have read some kind of normative judgment into my post which absolutely wasn't present. I wasn't trying to take any kind of side regarding any aspect of the Israel-Palestine situation whatsoever. I'm just thinking in terms of technology and possible outcomes, from a purely pragmatic point of view. You might have just started reading my post by trying to guess which side I was more likely to be on, and then confirmation bias may have just caused you to interpret the way I said things to validate that guess. (I could easily see someone also coming to the opposite conclusion from that post, for example. But you and they would both be wrong.) I don't think the language I used was "othering". I just think sometimes some things are talked about from an abstract, realpolitik-esque, mechanistic perspective, and sometimes things are talked about from a human and moral perspective. It's only a problem if you're trying to do the latter and you end up sounding like the former. However, you do make a valid point. I only brought up the afterlife component, but due to what you say, they may feel cornered, like they have less to lose and are making a last stand of sorts, which might further bolster determination and willingness to risk death. So that's another factor.
    - bsanr2 6y ago
      Unless you yourself believe, and expect that it is customary for most to believe, that people will undertake drastic, even suicidal, action in hopes of achieving a preferred afterlife, this is little more than a long-winded rationalization of your weaponization of an extremely offensive stereotype. And I think you know that; hence, the wall of text.
      - meowface 6y ago
        Your comments continue to confuse me. I wrote that text because I'm befuddled by these weird assumptions you're reading into my post and I wanted to explain where I was coming from. It's besides the point of the discussion, but I overwhelmingly support the Palestinians in the Israel-Palestine conflict and agree with your comments on the matter. Of course I sympathize with people struggling in desperation. I don't think it's offensive, or a stereotype, or untrue, to say that many of them are more okay with dying because they believe death isn't permanent and that the afterlife will be a positive experience. I think that's just a fact which carries no value judgment. Of course, I understand that even if they thought death were permanent, they still may brazenly risk death to fight for their cause, but my point was that the belief that it isn't permanent even further increases that determination to face death. This is just a thread about AI, not about politics, which is why I made it about AI.

meowface 6y ago

That's a good point. It seems like unless there's not only a 100% counter-attack success rate but also a 100% missile detonation prevention rate, many/most of the attackers will believe that they'll be entering paradise soon anyway, so even a chance of killing civilians means they likely won't be deterred. It might deter some percentage, but considering how many people gladly accept certain death, an increased chance of death isn't a big hurdle.

bsanr2 6y ago
This unnecessarily others the people on that side of the conflict. They are desperate because their credible and civilized protests of apparent apartheid, let alone global recognition of their claim to sovereignty, are ignored.
- meowface 6y ago
  You may have read some kind of normative judgment into my post which absolutely wasn't present. I wasn't trying to take any kind of side regarding any aspect of the Israel-Palestine situation whatsoever. I'm just thinking in terms of technology and possible outcomes, from a purely pragmatic point of view. You might have just started reading my post by trying to guess which side I was more likely to be on, and then confirmation bias may have just caused you to interpret the way I said things to validate that guess. (I could easily see someone also coming to the opposite conclusion from that post, for example. But you and they would both be wrong.) I don't think the language I used was "othering". I just think sometimes some things are talked about from an abstract, realpolitik-esque, mechanistic perspective, and sometimes things are talked about from a human and moral perspective. It's only a problem if you're trying to do the latter and you end up sounding like the former. However, you do make a valid point. I only brought up the afterlife component, but due to what you say, they may feel cornered, like they have less to lose and are making a last stand of sorts, which might further bolster determination and willingness to risk death. So that's another factor.
  - bsanr2 6y ago
    Unless you yourself believe, and expect that it is customary for most to believe, that people will undertake drastic, even suicidal, action in hopes of achieving a preferred afterlife, this is little more than a long-winded rationalization of your weaponization of an extremely offensive stereotype. And I think you know that; hence, the wall of text.
    - meowface 6y ago
      Your comments continue to confuse me. I wrote that text because I'm befuddled by these weird assumptions you're reading into my post and I wanted to explain where I was coming from. It's besides the point of the discussion, but I overwhelmingly support the Palestinians in the Israel-Palestine conflict and agree with your comments on the matter. Of course I sympathize with people struggling in desperation. I don't think it's offensive, or a stereotype, or untrue, to say that many of them are more okay with dying because they believe death isn't permanent and that the afterlife will be a positive experience. I think that's just a fact which carries no value judgment. Of course, I understand that even if they thought death were permanent, they still may brazenly risk death to fight for their cause, but my point was that the belief that it isn't permanent even further increases that determination to face death. This is just a thread about AI, not about politics, which is why I made it about AI.