I mean I literally just said I’m worried about military turning humans into machines, so I don’t know why you’d think I see the chain of command as “humanized.

I mean I literally just said I’m worried about military turning humans into machines, so I don’t know why you’d think I see the chain of command as “humanized.” However, I do believe the US military has a very strong “culture of accountability” - much more so than US police, US politicians, US civil servants, US scholars, or anything else in the US. I suppose autonomous weapons might not share that culture, but whoever is deploying them does. It’s worth pointing out that for a long time, drone strikes were the provenance of the CIA which lacks a formal chain of command. As long as the decision to deploy an autonomous weapon, and what’s its parameters are, is set by an accountable agent, I don’t see a ton of difference between the uncertainty in an autonomous weapon, and the uncertainty present in the chaos of war. See: US bombing of Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. Honestly, an autonomous weapon might be much more like to avoid non-military targets (like the Chinese consulate). If so, great! Edit. I reread your comment. Regarding atrocities, automous weapons can care about atrocities far more than non-autonomous weapons. A nuclear bomb or stick of dynamite doesn’t care who it’s blowing up. An intelligent targeting system does. A properly trained AI, with a secure audit log, could serve as a strong deterrent against violating the laws of war.