2 ms·
Well "fire and forget" is not new at all, but also not that problematic I think. If this targeted a sim card or something it could be seen as something close to
by anotheryou 5y ago
Well "fire and forget" is not new at all, but also not that problematic I think. If this targeted a sim card or something it could be seen as something close to an air to air missile that locks on to a target and then homes in.
I think the more dangerous version is drones doing the target selection (or actually any AI, on-board or not). And here it doesn't even matter much if there is a human in the loop, because he is likely to overestimate the drones confidence and press "confirm" most of the time. I think there were already reports of heuristic target selection (with a man in the loop).
- 7952 5y agoFor a long time weapons have become more and more accurate. You go from Norden bomb sites, star trackers and inertial navigation. To terrain tracking, laser guidance and GPS. The more precise it is the smaller the blast radius can be. And if you want really low collateral damage you need really good precision. That means boots on the ground or disintermediating humans entirely.
- anotheryou 5y agoYes. My point though is that it matters who selects the target, not how the killing is done. Though I'm surprised we still need to kill people. I thought wars are won by technology nowadays, so what good does it do to kill a person? But maybe after all individual people are still important to organizations and it's a deterrence.