4 ms·

There are a few different angles to this. 1. If any other state had done this, we'd be correctly calling this a terrorist attack and there wouldn't be any ques

by jmyeet 11mo ago

There are a few different angles to this. 1. If any other state had done this, we'd be correctly calling this a terrorist attack and there wouldn't be any question about it; and 2. Palantir was a partner in developing several AI systems used for targeting missile strikes in Gaza. Collectively these tend to be called Lavender [1][2]. Another of these systems is called "Where's Daddy". What does it do? It targets alleged militants at home so their families with be collateral damage [3]; and 3. These systems could not exist without the labor of the humans who create them so it raises questions about the ethics of everything we do as software engineers and tech people. This is not a new debate. For example, there were debates about who should be culpable for the German death machine in WW2. Guards at the camp? Absolutely. Civilians at IG Farben who are making Zyklon-B? Do they know what it's being used for? Do they have any choice in the matter? My personal opinion is that anyone continuing to work for Palantir can no longer plead ignorance. You're actively contributing to profiting from killing, starving and torturing civilians. Do with that what you will. In a just world, you'd have to answer for your actions at The Hague or Nuremberg 2.0, ultimately. [1]: https://www.business-humanrights.org/es/%C3%BAltimas-noticias/palantir-allegedly-enables-israels-ai-targeting-amid-israels-war-in-gaza-raising-concerns-over-war-crimes/ https://www.business-humanrights.org/es/%C3%BAltimas-noticia... [2]: https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/ https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/ [3]: https://www.businessinsider.com/israel-ai-system-wheres-daddy-strikes-hamas-family-homes-2024 https://www.businessinsider.com/israel-ai-system-wheres-dadd...

richardfeynman 11mo ago
* * *
- Cyph0n 11mo ago
  So the indiscriminate mass detonation of explosive devices is not terrorism? Are you aware of how many civilian casualties there were as a result of this attack? Would this be acceptable if Hezbollah did this to Israeli military officers?
  - richardfeynman 11mo ago
    The attack was by definition discriminate. I don't think there's an attack in modern history that was more targeted and had less collateral damage. The attack targeted hundreds Hezbollah leaders, who bought and used those pagers. There was minimal collateral damage among civilians amounting to unverified allegations that a child of a Hezbollah member was maimed, and some minor other damage. The explosives in the pagers were measured in grams, and the explosions were relatively small, specifically to minimize collateral damage.
    - Cyph0n 11mo ago
      It was indiscriminate in timing, location, and device possession. Unless you’re saying that the country behind a self-evaluated >80% civilian to combatant kill ratio in Gaza went through rigorous protocols to minimize harm in this attack?
      - richardfeynman 11mo ago
        The timing was during a war, the location was in a belligerent country, and the pagers were only and exclusively given to hezbollah leadership. The very definition of discriminate. Also, Israel has not "self-evaluated" a >80% civilian to combatant kill ratio. There was a Haaretz report that said the IDF was able to ID about 20% of those killed as militants against known databases, which is remarkably high compared to any other war. That doesn't mean the remaining 80% are civilians, it just means they weren't ID'd against a databse. So this includes anyone with a gun at a distance. Do you think Ukraine has a database of Russian soldiers and are able to ID 20% of the russian soldiers they kill against that database? Of course not. Israel's self evaluation of the ratio varies between 1.4:1 and 2:1 depending on the government official you quote.
        Cyph0n 11mo ago
        Re: timing - They were triggered to explode en masse, which implies that there was zero consideration to minimizing civilian harm. Re: location - They exploded everywhere you can think of, while these targets were doing civilian activities near other civilians, and not in a combat setting. Re: possession - Given the above, and Israel’s horrendous kill ratio, there was definitely no consideration for possession of these pagers at the time of the attack. For example, who is to say that some pagers weren’t in use by members of the political bureau, or unofficially resold to a hospital for use by oncall doctors?
- flyinglizard 11mo ago
  … and it’s not just that Israel woke up one morning and decided to take Hezbollah to the cleaners, either. Hezbollah started a military campaign against Israel on October 8th, 2023, one day after the most horrific attack Jews have experienced since the holocaust. I don’t think this attack could have been more moral or justified than it was. It didn’t even kill on large numbers, instead it was just enough to neutralize Hezbollahs command and control structures.
- viccis 11mo ago
  Would you call it terrorism when Israel sent mailbombs to US top brass, including our president?
  - richardfeynman 11mo ago
    This has not happened anywhere other than your imagination. You mean "if" not "when."
    - viccis 11mo ago
      Fortunately, it was well documented. Per the New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/1972/12/02/archives/letterbombs-mailed-to-truman-in-1947-truman-was-sent-bombs-book.html https://www.nytimes.com/1972/12/02/archives/letterbombs-mail...
      - richardfeynman 11mo ago
        This is what you call "well-documented"? Did you even read the article? This 1972 article cites unsubstantiated claims from memoirs written decades after the fact — not verified evidence. There is no solid historical documentation that Israel, the Israeli government, or even Lehi sent functional bombs to U.S. leadership in 1947. The only sources are anecdotal, inconsistent, and disputed. Crucially, there are no Secret Service or National Archives records of any assassination attempt on Truman by Zionist militants. A Freedom of Information Act request for such records produced nothing. Historians who have looked into the claim find no contemporaneous evidence and no confirmation in government archives. In other words, this is not a "documented Israeli attack on the U.S." Instead, it’s a story that survives (in spite of evidence that it's false) in the minds and narratives of people like you want it to be true. That’s how conspiracy theories work: weak evidence, strong emotion.
        viccis 11mo ago
        Ok, so I see you're taking a denialist approach. At best you will have to settle on "well they sure did send them to a bunch of British politicians, and ya know, they did carry out the King David Hotel bombing that killed 91 people via terrorism, and they did plan on terrorist bombing a bunch of Westerners and Arabs to blame it on communists and Muslim Brotherhood (the Lavon Affair) before getting caught, but they definitely didn't send them to Truman we pinky promise". This isn't even the most outrageous thing Lehi and Irgun did (trying to partner with Hitler against the British might take that) before the Israeli government disbanded them and merged most of them into the IDF when they no longer needed to terrorize the West.
Seattle3503 11mo ago
We have the ICC. It was set up by lawyers with subject matter expertise. The liberal democratic nations of the world could decide to start using and empowering that.
- FridayoLeary 11mo ago
  What for? To issue arrest warrants against dead terrorists and prime ministers who kill terrorists? They should stick to african warlords, maybe they can make a difference there.
  - Seattle3503 11mo ago
    If fully realized it would mean we actually have international law, including fair trials. Imagine slapping Putin in handcuffs when he touches down in any Western country, rather than the glad-handing and photo ops he gets now. Dictators play democracies off each other. International law is in part about solving a coordination problem.
    - FridayoLeary 11mo ago
      That's just wishful thinking. I would argue that by going after Israel in such a blatantly biased way the ICC and the UN have fallen to precisely the sort of groups you want to use them against. Not saying the ICC can't be useful, you would just have to massively limit the scope of their "authority" to realistic targets. I.e. South American dictators and various warlords. And of course islamic terrorists. Plenty of international law works because it actually serves a useful purpose for states like shipping. Countries don't like domestic terrorists and crime organisations. They would also prefer africa to be developed so they can trade.
      - sporkxrocket 11mo ago
        How is holding Israel accountable for it's very well documented war crimes "blatantly biased"?

by jmyeet 11mo ago

richardfeynman 11mo ago

* * *

Cyph0n 11mo ago
So the indiscriminate mass detonation of explosive devices is not terrorism? Are you aware of how many civilian casualties there were as a result of this attack? Would this be acceptable if Hezbollah did this to Israeli military officers?
- richardfeynman 11mo ago
  The attack was by definition discriminate. I don't think there's an attack in modern history that was more targeted and had less collateral damage. The attack targeted hundreds Hezbollah leaders, who bought and used those pagers. There was minimal collateral damage among civilians amounting to unverified allegations that a child of a Hezbollah member was maimed, and some minor other damage. The explosives in the pagers were measured in grams, and the explosions were relatively small, specifically to minimize collateral damage.
  - Cyph0n 11mo ago
    It was indiscriminate in timing, location, and device possession. Unless you’re saying that the country behind a self-evaluated >80% civilian to combatant kill ratio in Gaza went through rigorous protocols to minimize harm in this attack?
    - richardfeynman 11mo ago
      The timing was during a war, the location was in a belligerent country, and the pagers were only and exclusively given to hezbollah leadership. The very definition of discriminate. Also, Israel has not "self-evaluated" a >80% civilian to combatant kill ratio. There was a Haaretz report that said the IDF was able to ID about 20% of those killed as militants against known databases, which is remarkably high compared to any other war. That doesn't mean the remaining 80% are civilians, it just means they weren't ID'd against a databse. So this includes anyone with a gun at a distance. Do you think Ukraine has a database of Russian soldiers and are able to ID 20% of the russian soldiers they kill against that database? Of course not. Israel's self evaluation of the ratio varies between 1.4:1 and 2:1 depending on the government official you quote.
      - Cyph0n 11mo ago
        Re: timing - They were triggered to explode en masse, which implies that there was zero consideration to minimizing civilian harm. Re: location - They exploded everywhere you can think of, while these targets were doing civilian activities near other civilians, and not in a combat setting. Re: possession - Given the above, and Israel’s horrendous kill ratio, there was definitely no consideration for possession of these pagers at the time of the attack. For example, who is to say that some pagers weren’t in use by members of the political bureau, or unofficially resold to a hospital for use by oncall doctors?
flyinglizard 11mo ago
… and it’s not just that Israel woke up one morning and decided to take Hezbollah to the cleaners, either. Hezbollah started a military campaign against Israel on October 8th, 2023, one day after the most horrific attack Jews have experienced since the holocaust. I don’t think this attack could have been more moral or justified than it was. It didn’t even kill on large numbers, instead it was just enough to neutralize Hezbollahs command and control structures.
viccis 11mo ago
Would you call it terrorism when Israel sent mailbombs to US top brass, including our president?
- richardfeynman 11mo ago
  This has not happened anywhere other than your imagination. You mean "if" not "when."
  - viccis 11mo ago
    Fortunately, it was well documented. Per the New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/1972/12/02/archives/letterbombs-mailed-to-truman-in-1947-truman-was-sent-bombs-book.html https://www.nytimes.com/1972/12/02/archives/letterbombs-mail...
    - richardfeynman 11mo ago
      This is what you call "well-documented"? Did you even read the article? This 1972 article cites unsubstantiated claims from memoirs written decades after the fact — not verified evidence. There is no solid historical documentation that Israel, the Israeli government, or even Lehi sent functional bombs to U.S. leadership in 1947. The only sources are anecdotal, inconsistent, and disputed. Crucially, there are no Secret Service or National Archives records of any assassination attempt on Truman by Zionist militants. A Freedom of Information Act request for such records produced nothing. Historians who have looked into the claim find no contemporaneous evidence and no confirmation in government archives. In other words, this is not a "documented Israeli attack on the U.S." Instead, it’s a story that survives (in spite of evidence that it's false) in the minds and narratives of people like you want it to be true. That’s how conspiracy theories work: weak evidence, strong emotion.
      - viccis 11mo ago
        Ok, so I see you're taking a denialist approach. At best you will have to settle on "well they sure did send them to a bunch of British politicians, and ya know, they did carry out the King David Hotel bombing that killed 91 people via terrorism, and they did plan on terrorist bombing a bunch of Westerners and Arabs to blame it on communists and Muslim Brotherhood (the Lavon Affair) before getting caught, but they definitely didn't send them to Truman we pinky promise". This isn't even the most outrageous thing Lehi and Irgun did (trying to partner with Hitler against the British might take that) before the Israeli government disbanded them and merged most of them into the IDF when they no longer needed to terrorize the West.

Seattle3503 11mo ago

We have the ICC. It was set up by lawyers with subject matter expertise. The liberal democratic nations of the world could decide to start using and empowering that.

FridayoLeary 11mo ago
What for? To issue arrest warrants against dead terrorists and prime ministers who kill terrorists? They should stick to african warlords, maybe they can make a difference there.
- Seattle3503 11mo ago
  If fully realized it would mean we actually have international law, including fair trials. Imagine slapping Putin in handcuffs when he touches down in any Western country, rather than the glad-handing and photo ops he gets now. Dictators play democracies off each other. International law is in part about solving a coordination problem.
  - FridayoLeary 11mo ago
    That's just wishful thinking. I would argue that by going after Israel in such a blatantly biased way the ICC and the UN have fallen to precisely the sort of groups you want to use them against. Not saying the ICC can't be useful, you would just have to massively limit the scope of their "authority" to realistic targets. I.e. South American dictators and various warlords. And of course islamic terrorists. Plenty of international law works because it actually serves a useful purpose for states like shipping. Countries don't like domestic terrorists and crime organisations. They would also prefer africa to be developed so they can trade.
    - sporkxrocket 11mo ago
      How is holding Israel accountable for it's very well documented war crimes "blatantly biased"?