3 ms·

For the same reason "mass surveillance" is different than "targeted surveillance". The US government is performing "air strikes" orders of magnitude more often

For the same reason "mass surveillance" is different than "targeted surveillance". The US government is performing "air strikes" orders of magnitude more often than actual jet-based air strikes, to the point where it now kills people based on surveillance algorithms rather than a proper investigation of the target. It's going to be yet orders of magnitude worse when autonomous drones arrive (they are probably already in testing now) - and make no mistake, autonomous drones is an idea about as irresistible to the government as mass surveillance. Moore's Law will make autonomous drones too hard to resist.

CHY872 11y ago
> it now kills people based on surveillance algorithms rather than a proper investigation of the target. False. Algorithms should form part of a proper investigation of the target. Proper use of computers allows you to rule out innocents and provide intelligence in order to pick better targets. They can perform the grunt tasks, collecting and presenting reports and allowing the humans to focus on all the data available in order to more accurately make the decision. The algorithms should and do not dispatch the drones and do not make any type of decision like this. If information derived using computers didn't play a role in the modern militaries of the world, they wouldn't be modern militaries.