3 ms·
But the same thing happens with soldiers on the ground too. There confusion and accidents when people are shooting at each other all the time. That entire arti
by atrus 13y ago
But the same thing happens with soldiers on the ground too. There confusion and accidents when people are shooting at each other all the time.
That entire article could have easily been replaced with a marines perspective, a bombers perspective, or a sailors perspective.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- 1457389 13y agoThe difference is that we don't deploy our soldiers in the contexts and use-cases that we do with drones, because the risks are too great. Drones are expendable, so they are used in hostile conditions where the intelligence isn't as clear. That's why in practice they lead to high false positive rates. The real question is whether we should be using this technology to be waging war in areas where we wouldn't have done so otherwise.The choice between risking blood vs. risking electronics leads to a dangerous degree of latitude in how these weapons are deployed, that leads to a subsequent increase in civilian casualties which need not have occurred. Public health researchers face the same issue every day when they decide whether or not to deploy a new treatment with unwanted side effects. If the false positive rate of your diagnostic heuristics is too high, then the overall damage to society can easily outweigh the effectiveness of the treatment, no matter how technologically advanced or curative it is.
- opinali 13y agoWell said. Removing risk implies removing accountability.