4 ms·
No it’s not. It’s totally conceivable that the (perceived) quality of targeting data would contribute to the decision of whether to run a mission at all, and if
by dwb 10mo ago
No it’s not. It’s totally conceivable that the (perceived) quality of targeting data would contribute to the decision of whether to run a mission at all, and if so how extensively.
- whimsicalism 10mo agoisn’t that essentially true of any technology that reduces the civilian casualties of a conflict?
- dwb 10mo agoThe companies involved definitely want you to think that part of their noble goal is reducing civilian casualties. As far as I can see, though, that is pure propaganda.
- rkomorn 10mo agoYou can reduce civilian casualties by reducing the number of people considered civilians.
- whimsicalism 10mo agoi am not saying that is the case here, all i am saying is that your argument would apply to any technology that lets you better differentiate/target enemies vs. civilians, which suggests to me it is overbroad.
- dwb 10mo agoYou are reading perhaps more generality than I intended. To be clear, I am talking about the present greater-Anglo-American military-industrial complex, driven by present ideologies, in which the distinction between “enemy” and “civilian” itself is extremely debatable.
- mexicocitinluez 10mo agoAbsolutely. And that the people who stand to benefit the most from another war might want to filter/target that data in a way to make that more probable? I mean, I know it's a stretch. Especially with how benevolent our current class of billionaires are. But just imagine a guy who thinks money is more important than anything else. I know... another stretch. lol.