14 ms·
Palantir is extremely bad, but this not making the point you want to make. Hamas infamously wears civilian clothes during combat and operates out of civilian st
by ralop 1y ago
Palantir is extremely bad, but this not making the point you want to make. Hamas infamously wears civilian clothes during combat and operates out of civilian structures in civilian zones. We ought to oppose the destruction of democracy and the arrival of dystopia without defending terrorism.
- rileymat2 1y agoI am curious with all the import restrictions how easy it is to get non-civilian clothes. Proper uniforms would not be high on my list.
- petre 1y ago> We ought to oppose the destruction of democracy and the arrival of dystopia without defending terrorism. One might argue that tech like this was built thanks to terrorism.
- cookiengineer 1y agoMy point is about military efficiency, which is measured by avoiding civilian casualties. Palantir's tech is the opposite of that.
- Terr_ 1y agoBut they aren't civilians, the computer said so! /s
- wizzwizz4 1y agoThe Nuremberg defence meets "a computer must never make a management decision."
- Terr_ 1y agoRelevant book: Unaccountability Machines - https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/U/bo252799883.html https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/U/bo252799... Amusingly, I started reading it without knowing it was from the same author as another book I'd read before about the economics of scams, Lying For Money.
- chii 1y agoThey avoided larger number of civilian casualties/deaths. The strikes will happen, and if you did not know of the approximate location, you will then use more saturation strikes for _even more_ locations to ensure target is hit. The fact that a target _needs_ to be hit is indisputable.
- Terr_ 1y ago> The fact that a target _needs_ to be hit is indisputable. At best, you're confusing "indisputable" with "an input or requirement imposed by the user." At worst, the software is suggesting who ought to be killed, the user trusts the software, and then the software trusts the user's choice, and the magic of circular-logic supposedly absolves everyone involved of responsibility when murder happens.
- drewbeck 1y agoThe underlying ethos here is “the target must be hit, regardless of the number of civilian casualties,” which is actually evil. “Palantir allowed us to go from 10000 civilian casualties per target hit to 9000” is not some win, it’s a confession of genocidal intent.
- padjo 1y agoDo you expect Hamas to line up in a field and go to war like it’s the 18th century?
- burnerthrow008 1y agoMy memory is a bit rusty, but I can't recall any time that "we would have lost if we didn't do it" was used as a successful defense at a war crimes trial. Normally you go with "that didn't actually happen" or "that was an isolated incident by rogue commanders".
- padjo 1y agoI have no idea what your point is? I suppose you’re implying they should just give up? Sure I’d support that so long as the other side also give up. And let’s be clear, Isreal commit plenty of war crimes of their own using excuses you describe. Personally that seems more morally reprehensible to me given it is utterly unnecessary.
- andrepd 1y agoCriticising an ongoing genocide, one aided by """AI""" sv tech at that, is not defending terrorism. Jesus Christ.
- stormking 1y ago[flagged]
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- andrepd 1y agoThe UN Special Rapporteur's report indicates as much. This is from early 2024, the evidence has only mounted since then. Would you mind explaining which points in particular you don't agree? https://undocs.org/en/A/HRC/55/73 https://undocs.org/en/A/HRC/55/73
- stormking 1y ago[flagged]
- h4ck_th3_pl4n3t 1y ago[flagged]
- thunderfork 1y ago[dead]
- andrepd 1y agoDamn, sure showed me.
- vouwfietsman 1y agoThe international community is quickly catching up to the fact that what you're saying has not been true for a long time.