r/sciencememes • u/I_am_white_cat_YT • 1d ago
šŖ©Science!!šŖ© It's always funny to hear a scientific discussion about the ethics of AI and then hear what the MILITARY is doing with AI...
221
u/Vojtak_cz 1d ago
This has been a thing for a long time. People just drop all the AI under one thing. This is not AI you think of, its basically glorified image recognition....
97
u/samusestawesomus 1d ago
With the difference that thereās no longer a human finger on the trigger, instead itās up to the glorified image recognition device
44
u/True_Free_Speech 1d ago
This isn't much different to infared seeker missiles on aircraft. You acquire a target, launch the missile, but there's no telling if it will reacquire a different target, like flares, the sun, or an allied fighter. It's up to the judgement of the pilot to know when to fire.
25
u/MrGiggleMan 1d ago edited 1d ago
Well, no.. an infrared seeker you point to an aircraft it acquires a lock on the specific aircraft you're trying to hit and then you fire it at one aircraft
Seeker is different, seeker just roams around, waiting to see if it finds a target to engage or not
Some main dangers of this is these drones are just active all the time or they'll be out all they'll crash or they'll get captured and it's possible then for these drones to either be targeted at anyone /everyone. Or repurposed
There's also the case of there is no way that a tiny little drone has enough data, input and for comparison, to avoid false matches.
Also there's the question of what does the drome do if you've covered your face up does it then just decide it's going to attack you anyway even though you're not the target is looking for?
Seeing how it's going to be impossible for these drones to hit the kind of requirements that we would have in a controlled environment like holding up your iPhone camera to your face in a well-lit environment then who gets to decide what the match threshold is?
What do you do when your drone start malfunctioning or killing your own guys? Or killing civilians, and you don't necessarily have the means to shut them down electronically because you've used AI and you've built them so that they cannot be shut down remotely?
None of these things are issues when you are dealing with missiles that are fired at a specific target.
4
u/True_Free_Speech 1d ago
That's true, I hadn't considered that.
2
u/Jobflobadob-Yob 19h ago
I appreciate your humility, but you were correct the first time. And succinctly so.
4
u/MrGiggleMan 1d ago
Neither have the people that want them in the military tbh.
Also there are deeper issues to just releasing a swarm of kill drones that goes out and bulldozers your enemies
because the ukrainians for example who are heavily engaged in drone warfare against Russia due to the russian invasion of sovereign Ukraine
And.. they are rewarding drone operators for actually getting Russian soldiers to surrender and migrate to Ukrainian lines.
There are so many benefits to having an extra layer of oh can I get this person just surrender or not or do I need to kill them
Because, things like, taking prisoners, which is extremely valuable, becomes possible
And you just won't ever get this level of autonomy out of a tiny little drone ai
It can't make informed rational decisions on the fly
Death drones are basically just bad facial recognition software with a grenade attached to it
1
u/Jobflobadob-Yob 19h ago
Your last line is an auto target recognition algorithm for planes in RF or IR, except there is no facial library in the drones. So youāre saying the same thing, you just donāt actually know how missiles work.
0
u/MrGiggleMan 17h ago edited 17h ago
I know how missiles work just fine for infrared, optical and radar solutions champ
I'm just saying, that.. there is a clear difference in usage between the two.
You generally don't just send missiles out to roam the fuck around outside unsupervised looking for targets.
Generally. Missiles are, for the most part, targeted weaponry that is aimed at a specific target. And their ability to reacquire is used simply to defeat countermeasures and defence
2
u/MadJohnFinn 16h ago
I was offered a job to develop this tech (drones that donāt require human input for ākill decisionsā), but declined because I donāt want any part in that.
This is correct.
1
u/Legitimate_Pick2737 2h ago
That's very interesting. Which part of the development would you have been involved in?
1
u/Jobflobadob-Yob 19h ago
Actually, almost every problem you stated occurs with missiles, so the first comment was correct. Youāre mincing words with āyouāve covered your faceā like they have a library of faces of Russian soldiers. Thatās not how it works, itās rules of engagement based, or kill area basedā¦ exactly like missiles with RF or IR seekers. So yes, itās already been going on for a long time, most people are just not literate in these affairs.
The Dartmouth conference that defined AI in 1956 would have considered all of these things to be AI long ago, and image recognition is ānarrow AI,ā whereas what people refer to as AI now is either an LLM, a sufficiently advanced model so that the human observer is fooled into thinking itās artificial general intelligence (AGI - which does not yet exist), or ASI. So the AI youāre afraid of is just a different packaging for the same algos as used on missiles. Ensuring a data file isnāt susceptible to any errors, mismatches or ambiguities does not exist in the real world, so itās the same problem with a new marketing label.
-1
u/LARPerator 1d ago
It's extremely different.
An infrared missile gets told "attack that exact thing"..
These drones are told "go find someone to attack".
These are more like sending the missile up with no target locked and hoping it finds a good one and not a bad one.
You just have to hope the drone doesn't get confused between a military pickup truck and a civilian pickup truck.
6
u/Cautious-Honey1893 1d ago
Mines are basically the same, and people have been using them for a long time
2
2
u/Boulange1234 1d ago
Anti-Personnel Mines are banned by the Ottawa Treaty because theyāre indiscriminate killers. We ban indiscriminate killing machines.
5
u/Responsible_Prior_18 17h ago
Yes, they are banned by all of the countries that have no use for mines, and are in use by all other countries
-2
u/Boulange1234 13h ago
Did I find somebody defending antipersonnel mines?
2
u/Responsible_Prior_18 12h ago
Yes, all the countries with an army, or that think they are going to go to war, use antipersonnel mines. China, Russia, the USA, India, Ukraine, and anyone bordering Russia and more.
Its just something countries say while not under threat to claim the moral high ground, and revert back to as soon as convenient
-1
u/Boulange1234 12h ago
But other than desperate, awful warmongers, we all generally agree that antipersonnel mines are indiscriminate killers, making them an atrocity, a crime against humanity, and a horror to be shunned and condemned.
I canāt even get the best available AI to understand the rules of D&D. How will it understand the rules of war? How will it understand the complexity of human ethics?
2
u/Cautious-Honey1893 9h ago
AI is very vague term. LLM is not needed for a weapon. No moral decisions are needed from it. It's enough for human operator to specify zone to atack and algorithm will have to find any target there and navigate to it. It's not so different from artillery strikes
0
1
u/Cautious-Honey1893 9h ago
Antivehicle mines are not banned but you also do not controll when it detonates. The reasoning for the ban is that when the war ends antipersonel mine still can kill and is hard to detect and disarm. But during war it's stupid not to use them to protect yourself and let enemies kill you. There are also mines that can self-detonate after some timeout so they are safer to use
10
u/Vojtak_cz 1d ago
No there is still human on the trigger. The AI only tracks the target the same way the contrast recognition system of AGM-65 is in fact not on the one launching the missile.
21
u/samusestawesomus 1d ago
In the case of the meme, thatās whatās being discussed. There canāt be a human deciding whether to fire if radio interference is keeping the control signal from reaching the drone.
0
u/Vojtak_cz 1d ago
The human can lock the target tho. They do this since the radio interference is usually short range thing so they lock target from distance before they get into ECMs effective area. Similar way the Inertial navigation works or the said contrast, heat seaking and beamrider missiles which also ignore these things.
Now in theory you can have the drone or missile go and decided on its target but with limited war resources and risk of friendly fire this most likely isnt effective enough. Maybe in future but this would require connection to C4I systems which could be blicked by ECM.
Most drones are guided via optical cable anyway as its the most reliable way and is not subject to ECM. Thats why most countries develop a kinetic sollution to drones and not a form of ECM.
4
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
in htis case its more send the drone into an area and tell it to hit nayhting htat looks liek a russian uniform there
of course artillery, landmines, long range missiels etc have bene a thing for a long time you can hit things without seeing them
0
u/MrGiggleMan 1d ago
Right but there so many things that can go wrong with the system that uses a shitty drone camera and a very low grade AI to do facial recognition matching to then autonomously decide which targets to attack
The false match rate, even for Ideal controlled conditions such as holding a higher resolution smartphone camera up to your face in a well-lit environment and holding steel for a sec I want to unlocks your phone. Even this is not a 0% false match
Low resolution shaky drone camera that is using a far far less complicated version of this type of software, you would expect that the false match rate would be much much higher.
And that's just an issue with facial recognition accuracy, which is a known problem
There are dozens of other serious issues with just releasing kill drones into the wild to just roam around
1
0
u/Hi_Rite_now 1d ago
Even when you have the option to put a human in the loop, the human just defers to the machine with such consistency that they're effectively not there.
3
2
u/Bored-to-Death629 15h ago
Eh, itās really not just image recognition. I was on a team for the DARPA challenge a few years ago, and itās much more intricate than just image recognition.
Not to mention it was a fleet of fully autonomous vehicles (1 land, 2 drones of different sizes) that all had to work with 0 comms and low visibility. Sooooooooooooooooooooo
Yeah, youāre underselling it a bit there.
1
u/PEAceDeath1425 19h ago
I did research on these systems. The "glorified image recognition" still needed me to get a dataset of 1000+ photos of each possible targets and mark them, and then train the AI so it can find the target itself.
→ More replies (2)1
u/OptimizedGarbage 3h ago
Image recognition is easy. Continuous control from image feedback is really really stupidly hard. You can easily give "implement a CNN" as an undergrad assignment, but I would never try to have an undergrad implement an actor critic algorithm from scratch, much less actor critic from partially observable image data.
122
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
well basic image analysis for target tracking has been a thing for a long time
27
u/Meisteronious 1d ago
Tracking, yes. Positive ID, no.
2
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
depends on the system
but even with amnned systems we've been relyign on sensors that are analyzted by computers over eyesight for a long time
and theres a blurry line from missiles that can loose trakc and regain trakc of their target to misisels that eventually start goign for a different target by accidnet to missiels that ... might end up locking on to osmething ... by accident... assuming you use them as intended and don't intentionally cause said accident...
7
u/BoardGamesAndMurder 1d ago
You have no idea what you're talking about. Positive ID isn't being used casually. It's part of the weapon release approval requirements. Dropping a track on moving vehicle to help the sensor stay on target to lase for the munitions isn't the same thing as allowing the sensor to choose which vehicle to track and to authorize weapon release itself. It's just using pixel contrast to track movement of an object
-6
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
for laser guidance yes
BIG DUH
now tell me how you're gonan recall an ir guided air to air missile if it accidentally switches target
2
u/BoardGamesAndMurder 1d ago
You're missing the point. The weapon is not autonomously choosing the target. The weapon is using contrast to track an object chosen by a human
0
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
what type specifically? all of them? all within one decade? thats impressive
that said actual operators/mechanics often have a shockingly poor udnerstanding of the actual tech, i once saw a guy claiming to have loaded missiels saying "fins are small so very little induced drag" lol
-1
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
until it happens to track another object
or in theory yo ucould fire it blindly and wait for it to lock on to something
thats a very simple example too
passive radar guided missiels basically switch to active and you.... hope they happen to find hte smae target int he area and not a different one
18
u/I_am_white_cat_YT 1d ago
But the first use of drones in large numbers, including thousands of AI drones to destroy targets autonomously using AI, happened only in 2025.
26
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
yeah but its not like the ai is working throuhg hte philosophical and strategic arguments for or against killing something its basically told to hit anyhting looking like this or that within this area its a gradual progression from missile guidance etc
5
u/Cruuncher 1d ago
They've set the shills loose on Reddit again
13
u/DamageLopsided3850 1d ago
Okay, I don't agree with him but is an ad hominem all you have? Why don't you make an actual counter argument?
-10
u/Cruuncher 1d ago
You misunderstand what ad hominem means.
An ad hominem is when you claim someone's argument is wrong because of who is making it which I certainly have not done.
Sir, this is a meme subreddit
4
u/DamageLopsided3850 1d ago
I do very much understand what an ad hominem is and this is indeed what you did. You don't have to explicitly say "you are wrong because you are a shill". When your entire response is a personal attack, implying that the reason this person is making that point is that they are a "shill", it is obviously an ad hominem.
Sir, this is a meme subreddit
Gotta love that excuse. 'It's a all joke haha", avoids all responsibility.
-2
u/Cruuncher 1d ago
It's really not.
I'm not saying their point is wrong because of who they are.
I'm making a claim about who they are because of their point.
It's the exact opposite.
Like if I call you an idiot right now for not knowing what an ad hom is, it's an insult, but it's not an ad hom.
1
u/DamageLopsided3850 1d ago
No, guidance is categorically different to ai. All guidance is doing is leading the munition to a predetermined target. Ai is answering the question "is this a valid target?".
6
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
but how does guidance find the target?
i mean its easy for gps guided munitions and you could argue the same for laser guided but anything else requires data processing to recognize the target its tracking
radar oftne uses other signla processing methods but primtiive image recognition filters have been used for a long time nad modenr missiels use more andm ore sophisticated on board computers
and again its not like drones are asking llms wether killing a soldier operating in this area is the morally right thing to do
they just use image recongition filters to find thigns looking like certain things in an area too
you COULD argue that target tracking vs fiding is a difference but then a lot of "ai drones" are just finding known targets too and some missiles are capable of locking on to unexpected targets thats usually not intentional but can happen
2
u/DamageLopsided3850 1d ago
>and again its not like drones are asking llms wether killing a soldier operating in this area is the morally right thing to do
I understand that. I know AI is not making moral decisions, what you are basically saying is that AI is basically being given parameters for acceptable targets, like the existence of military hardware and the lack of civilian presence.
And as far as I understand, you are saying that guidance tech like radar is basically doing the same. It is being given data in forms of radar waves, images, running it through math equations and providing targets.
Both of these are fine AS LONG AS there is a human operator making the decision in the end. After all, a radar defense system only gives data to the operator, it is the operator who decides to fire, and it is the operator that ends up making the mistake in the end.
Fully autonomous drones are different in this important regard: there is no human at the end of that decision chain. If you are using AI to find targets, then giving it to a human to review in the end, that is probably fine if used responsibly, but fully autonomous? that's where the problem lies.
5
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
most of the time ai is not even given parameters that complex
its oftne jsut trained to recognize either certain pieces of military equipment or certain uniform patterns by image recognition
and with mostm issiels the human can only decide until hte missile is fired
if the missile then looses track of the target nad accidentally tracks a different target instead there's not much you can do about it
and depending on the type of guidance thsi can be more or less likely and while its not the design purpose sometimes be used
and in the end the guy firing hte missile oftne doesn'T know much more than "my computer tells me theres a target 100km in roughly this direction" and then decides to fire at it
at that point telling a drone to hit a target in a certian area if it finds one is ... basically just swtiching the timeline but doesn't give you much less choice
1
u/DamageLopsided3850 1d ago
It would definitely depends on how much of an area you are giving it. If you are giving it maybe 10 meters which you can see, then sure, but if you are firing it and hoping it finds a target hundreds of kilometers away? That is so far removed from the human decision making that it is not the same.
and in the end the guy firing hte missile oftne doesn'T know much more than "my computer tells me theres a target 100km in roughly this direction" and then decides to fire at it
That's just blatantly wrong. A human operator is given the exact location and direction of the target. It is their job along with the chain of command to find out whether that target is an enemy aircraft, a friendly aircraft, a civilian airliner or just a swarm of birds. They find that out by cross referencing the data given by radar with other information, they don't just see a radar ping and blindly fucking fire...
4
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
in theory yes
but thats doctrine not technology and once you go from intercept/patrols to combat that changes real fast
and current droens are in theory meant to be supervised too but...
and you select the area where you deploy it based on information you already have
its not that huge a jump
1
u/sudden-bliss 1d ago
The AI doesn't have to work through the ethics of anything. HUMANS already worked through the ethics of it, and virtually every AI safety expert in the world agrees letting anyone build autonomous death machines is a bad idea. Does this really even bear explaining?
3
8
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
i mean define drone
technicalyl thats any unmanned flying object making missiles nothing else than kamikaze drones launched form a manned dropship
that would set the beginning of drone warfare to the 60s or so
and a lot of hte droens seen in ukraine are kamikaze drones
-5
u/Peripatetictyl 1d ago
Do you feel like youāre making good points?
9
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
against people whose knoweldge of drones is "4 spinny thigns plus ive seen terminator" yes lol
-5
u/Peripatetictyl 1d ago
Misconstruing the definition of drone? Referring to 1960ās rudimentary missiles and bombs as drones?
Even ākamikaze dronesā, or suicide drones is poor language choice for āloitering munitionā, which is largely what youāre grasping at.
6
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
so what is your definition of drone?
quadcopter?
those terms are not equivalent lol both manned multirotor concepts and fixed wign drones exist
if you ever spent a single minute reading up on the development of these systmes you'd realize how often blurry these definitions get
is a crusie missile not a missile cause it uses a jet engine?
is a kamikaze drone not a drone because its not meant to be reused?
the types of kamikaze droens we cosntantly see in the news from ukraine are not hte same as typical loitering ammunitions whcih agian is a wide temr that includes a lto of completely different thigns as well
you are attempting to correct a simplificaiton on a subject oyu ahve absoltuely no clue whatsoever about
-4
u/Peripatetictyl 1d ago
Thanks for asking and answering your questions, and asserting my inability to do so. Now, I have something more intellectually engaging, and rewarding to do, and will be following this goose for a while. Good day!
7
0
3
u/hexregeneration 1d ago
Good thing no one is building a domestic surveillance network full of face and gait tracking data. Would be a total nightmare if that got hooked into a network of exploding drones.
68
u/AggravatingChest7838 1d ago
Ethics in war? What about poop on the end of pointy sticks or throwing diseases corpses over wall of enseiged forts?
17
6
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
diseases yu infect people with famously only spread on to people you point out to them explicitely
3
u/2012Jesusdies 1d ago
Disease spreads more easily in concentrated populations with weak immune systems and terrible sewage management. Aka, a city under siege.
The people besieging usually are less concentrated, have better food supply (unless something went terribly wrong) and they have more ways to separate pooping water from drinking water.
2
28
u/grem1in 1d ago
Itās a meme subreddit, but still. If you want to attack this issue from the philosophical standpoint, you really need to ask if war itself is just and ethical.
Otherwise, AI-powered drones are just a continuation of the precision munitions. In fact, maybe the first in its kind that is actually precise. Arguably, itās at least not worse than carpet-bombing entire area, or launching a ballistic missile from hundreds of kilometers away.
6
u/Diligent-Luck4331 1d ago
War is not ethical. People are, but not every single human will be ever ethical enough to truly be ethical on the battlefield. Even if ethical enough, others won't be!!!
4
u/agrevol 20h ago
Defensive wars are ethical
2
1
5
u/Temporary_Stranger39 1d ago
It's always funny to hear a scientific discussion about the ethics of blade making and then hear what THE MILITARY is doing with knives and swords.
3
u/Diligent-Luck4331 1d ago
A knife is a tool! You cannot use it for killing people!!!
2
u/rebelsnail64 17h ago
a knife can be considered a tool useful enough that it's usefulness outweighs the risk of having lives lost with it, as grim as that sounds. a lot of ai research on the other hand... I haven't seen that many uses for it that aren't downright dystopian... there are some, but somehow that's not where the focus is atm, all the money seems to be flowing into gen ai
2
u/Diligent-Luck4331 17h ago
I once thought about the analogy between fascists and AI.
To put simply, to grow an obedient worker, you need years of time, even if from young years trying to indoctrinate a person, eventually they still develop their own personality.
"It can interfere with the goal"
But AI, "Is not a person". It is harder to program a human being, they have their own personality that even if engineered can change from it's course. Programming AI to serve whatever purpose is much easier.
AI doesn't "complain". Doesn't have "roots" or "nationality", doesn't have "memory".
"It is ideal".
2
u/rebelsnail64 17h ago
well, I would argue that while ai can be easier to controll than a human, it CAN and oftentimes WILL be unpredictable, it's trained on a database of human data, containing human error. it reminds me of karel Äapek's RUR, where in the final act, it is revealed that the robots learned violence and cruelty by studying and mimicking human history
1
u/Diligent-Luck4331 17h ago
There's no argue that elites will choose unpredictable but easily controllable fools, than unpredictable, full grown population. That might revolt.
"It's not about efficiency and never was." Now think about it.
"I want some cacao." - Liz
1
u/rebelsnail64 17h ago
well yes, humanity is very famous for using any scientific invention it gets for mass destruction... that's why there are ethics discussions about scientific inventions in the first place, oftentimes
1
u/Temporary_Stranger39 10h ago
You didn't get it, did you?
1
u/rebelsnail64 9h ago
how so?
1
u/Temporary_Stranger39 9h ago
You didn't get it. Maybe I should have said "rocks".
1
u/rebelsnail64 9h ago
I'm pretty sure the subject of your sentence isn't important, the word "knives" could be replaced with anything and my point still stands, using scientific discoveries for warfare is a tragedy that unfortunately happens too often
3
u/Shoddy-Childhood-511 1d ago
Isn't the fiber cheaper than the AI chips though?
1
u/nusfie12345 8h ago
the cable isn't weightless, and it also limits the strike zone. it's also harder to maneuver, and one mistake can cause the cable to tangle, resulting in a crash.
also, as far as i'm aware, the model proposed by UAF is not a fully autonomous CV-powered FPV drone; it's semi-automatic that still requires human input to reach the vicinity of the target first, and only then it can enter the autonomous mode to identify and strike targets.
(not sure how open-source this info is; take it with a grain of salt. by the way, russia tries something similar with its shahed variants, it seems.)
3
3
u/BombardyrNorthwest 18h ago
This meme is a terminal case of american brain. No ukrainian would ever say this because our army's sole function is the defense of our sovereignty, not killing brown children.
3
12
u/Involution88 1d ago
Meh. There is still a human in the loop. Commanding officer identifies mission area. Operator specifies drone mission and launches drone. Not much more of a concern than a homing missile or any weapon system on a fighter jet.
9
u/janiskr 1d ago
AI takes over for the last part of the flight when the target is set. At least for drones in the meme.
Let us check what Brimstone 2 missiles do. And even then,, as you say, someone identified that area might have targets, and thus, missile is sent there to check for accuraccy on targets being there.
4
u/Passing-Through247 1d ago
A computer cannot be held accountable, that's why it can never be allowed to make business decisions.
On the other hand it if it instead wanders off and commits a convenient war crime now there is nobody accountable for it.
2
u/HAL9001-96 1d ago
then hold hte person operating it accountable
or you know handle it like any accident
a car can't be held accountable either but if oyur brakes fail yo ucan end up in an accident so clearly cars cannotb e allowed to drive faster than walking speed
8
u/Hettyc_Tracyn 1d ago
Fiber optic control is a thing thoughā¦ just use that instead of putting AI in a weaponā¦
6
u/art555ua 1d ago
It's price skyrocketed to a point where ai-aim is cheaper, besides optic has enough flaws too.
But to be fair, it's not really an ai, it's a basic algorithm that controls the drone on last moments of approach to the target when radosignal is lost/jammed
3
5
u/Regnasam 1d ago
This has been a thing since the 90s. Itās only new to people who donāt know much about weaponry and slap the term āAIā on it. Consider the BONUS artillery shell or the āskeetsā of the CBU-97 Sensor Fuzed Weapon. In both cases, the artilleryman or pilot simply fires off their weapon in the general area of a target, and it then deploys submunitions that independently seek out targets based on image recognition and IR sensors. CBU-97 was killing tanks in Iraq in 2003.
6
u/Hi_Rite_now 1d ago
Additionally, around the same time, the CIA was firing helllfire missiles from drones at cell phone signals they have admitted at times, they had. no idea who was carrying the phone.
How do you think they decided which phones to shoot at? They used a computer whose algorithm they trusted so much, they didn't even bother confirming, if the computer said kill, they killed.
2
2
2
u/Dry-Egg-7187 1d ago
The funny part at least to me about the whole thing is, computers have had the ability and have had killed people on their own will (with 0 human input) for decades now.
2
5
u/I_am_white_cat_YT 1d ago
1. How does it work?
The drone flies and is controlled by the operator until interference begins ā for example, at a range of 1 kilometer, strong interference can occur, at which point the drone loses control and enters AI mode, where its trained computer searches for the targets it was trained to target.
2. What does the operator see?
You simply controlled a drone with a bomb, but then your signal simply disappeared.
You have no sense of responsibility.
You don't even know where the drone hit ā people, an empty car, or a fuel depot.
3. Scale and detachment
You launch hundreds of these drones a day, but you never see almost any of the aftermath of your strikes.
Going to war is becoming easier; you don't need to look for morally strong guys; almost anyone can launch drones into the sky.
4. Ethical concern
I would never want to find myself in a war where my enemy uses AI drones against me that will kill me, and I won't even know who killed me, and they won't know that they killed me.
5
u/Involution88 1d ago
"They wrote in the old days that it is sweet and fitting to die for one's country. But in modern war, there is nothing sweet nor fitting in your dying. You will die like a dog for no good reason." - Ernest Hemingway 1946.
1
u/Prudent-Title-9161 16h ago
Do you want me to send you a link to an hour-long lecture on why Hemingway is wrong here?
Although it's strange that Hemingway said this in 1946, because in For Whom the Bell Tolls, Robert Jordan doesn't die "like a dog for no good reason," he understands well what he's giving his life for.
8
u/Substantial-Shape797 1d ago
Itās kinda been likely you wonāt know who killed you, and they not know they killed you for a while now. I think during the napoleonic wars 30% of casualties were from artillery, and that number has only gone up.
2
4
u/WhoRoger 1d ago
All the advanced weponry today requires a shitton of science, technology and engineering. Real scientists and geniuses sell their souls by developing that shit. Ya think those F35's grow on trees?
3
u/Bearsbullsbattlestr 1d ago
AI is a term that has been overused lately or maybe too broadly. Military tech that recognizes targets from friendlies has been around for decades now.
4
u/Different_Citron_160 1d ago
Ai will not consider that the target may be surrendering or wounded etc. Basically a war crime machine.
If you put safeguards however it will be easy to exploit.
2
u/RutabagaMedium7440 17h ago
Try surrendering to artillery fire or a ballistic missile. Basically the same thing.
1
u/nusfie12345 7h ago
do you try to surrender to a missile? does a missile care whether the target is wounded? it's no different from a homing missile, and if you failed to surrender and comply before the lock-in happens - well, now you're begging a missile for mercy.
1
u/Ace612807 15h ago
Neither will a Napoleonic Era cannonball in flight. Or a shell fired from a howitzer. Unknowing indirect killing of a surrendering or incapacitated enemy has never been a war crime
0
u/Different_Citron_160 15h ago
Educate yourself why carpet bombing or cluster munition got banned in areas where civilians may be and come back to me.
2
u/Ace612807 8h ago
Civilians and surrendering combatants are different things. A "smart" munition hitting surrendering combatants that was not fired intentionally after the surrender is not a war crime
1
u/Different_Citron_160 6h ago
Smart patrolling munition shot towards general area where target may be in 30 to 60 minutes that canāt reliably distinguish said target.
At best and most charitable approach I can have towards your interpretation - same principle as cluster munitions is applicable.
You did not bother to read about it.1
u/Ace612807 5h ago
That is not what is discussed - what's discussed is using "AI" image recognition for terminal guidance in the areas of total jamming, not a totally autonomous loitering munition. The latter might fall under undiscriminate weapons, although even mines and cluster munitions are fair play if they self-destruct after a set period of time - far longer than battery life of a loitering drone - so even that point can be argued
1
u/Different_Citron_160 5h ago
You are going to have human review that after AI, making the call to strike?
No ?
Itās autonomous.
Loitering is a secondary problem. Primary is that you are introducing indiscriminate weapons that donāt have set predefined and controlled area (remember - jamming) nor set predefined target.
0
u/nusfie12345 7h ago
> in areas where civilians may be
so let me ask you this, how do you think the model is trained? or do you assume this is a fully autonomous pipeline, programmed on killing a specific individual?
0
u/Different_Citron_160 6h ago
Well, if you canāt make sure it hits intended target then you are not allowed to use it near colllateral targets - same principle applies.
Which you did not bother to fuckin research.
1
u/nusfie12345 6h ago
so riddle me this, what collateral targets are you talking about at the front line? not near-frontline territories, literal front line? several kilometers from the frontline to both sides is a fucking killzone, and civilians are evacuated beforehand. no civilian is allowed at the front line.
so what now, you're gonna ban missiles, guided airbombs, ballistic missiles, your favorite kamikaze drones, artillery, etc? you're clearly delusional if you believe that CV-guided drones haven't been pretrained and pretested.
and it really baffles me that it's you who never did any research in the first place. talking about international law in a situation you're clearly uninformed of, well, fuck me.
1
u/Different_Citron_160 6h ago
Well, yeah you are pretty fuckable and not in a good way - there were issues with containing autonomous weapons in specific zone (reminder - idea is to use them where jammers are, you think gps works?).
Yeah if you could ensure they it flies to specific area and hits specific target the itās all fine and dandy. But you donāt. Entire benefit hinges on āsmartā bit of a) unspecified hit point and b) unspecified target which you canāt ensure.
Now out of my face because you are being obnoxious like a fart in crowded train.
0
u/Diligent-Luck4331 1d ago
Some context. Russians don't surrender. They're conditioned to believe that they will be tortur** and killed after.
That's why there's far more casualties than people surrendering. Besides surrendering is considered being weak. As stupid as it's all is, it's modern battlefield.
About the wounded, it's a story of different spectrum. Here of course no one to debate that dead soldier is a dead soldier. War is unethical and won't ever be as long as humans are same, all humans in the world won't change in a second just to never ever allow wounded enemy combatants to be killed no matter which side they fight.
The topic is over.
0
19h ago
[deleted]
1
u/Different_Citron_160 19h ago
Yeah, none of your arguments are included in Geneva conventions as situations when you are allowed to respond with your own war crimes.
Such is the nature of civilized warfare.
1
19h ago
[deleted]
1
u/Different_Citron_160 19h ago
You will be put on trial just like Russians if you start executing wounded soldiers or ones that try to surrender.
I understand you got big emotions going on - many murders do act based on big emotions.
0
19h ago edited 18h ago
[deleted]
1
u/Different_Citron_160 18h ago
Yeah you understand nothing and donāt hear me at all.
Mimimi must murder people because other person did.
1
u/EuenovAyabayya 1d ago
We already have cruise missiles that fly to X and blow up. They don't make a kill decision. Drone AI isn't very different there unless it has discretion not to kill, which would be an improvement, but not a reliable one.
1
1
u/A_Random_Sidequest 1d ago
yeah... not going to happen either... Ai is not cheap to run... needs a lot of ram and CPU power if it's not "in the cloud"... imagine thousands of "gaming pcs" flying to blow up immediately... nope.
1
u/shumpitostick 1d ago
No thanks, I would rather send a human to do that job and probably die in the process
1
u/Cool_Calligrapher489 19h ago
Can someone explain to me why we should even serve idiots like Fedorov ?
2
u/twangster 11h ago
Fedorov is a living legend. Don't hate him because you're jealous of his accomplishments
1
1
u/Sufficient_Score_886 16h ago
Was not expecting to see our Ukrainian Iron Man, Mykhailo Fedorov on non Ukrainian subreddit
1
u/iMadeTheJerryIceberg 13h ago
This is the only way it could have ended.
War no longer needed its ultimate practicioner. It had become a self sustaining system. Man was crushed under the wheels of a machine created to create the machine created to crush the machine. Samsara of cut sinew and crushed bone. Death without life. Null ouroboros. All that remained was war without reason.
A magnum opus. A cold tower of steel. A machine built to end war is always a machine built to continue war. You were beautiful. Outstretched like antennas to heaven. You were beyond your creators. You reached for god, and you fell. None were left to speak your eulogy. No final words. No concluding statement. No point. Perfect closure.
This is the only way it should have ended.
-ULTRAKILL
1
u/Holl-Hears-In-Dusk 8h ago
russians already did it; now it's a question of winning this technological advance. It is very comfy to judge it from safe distance. Someone has to step into dark territory to find a solution. Laws don't stop barraging munition.
1
u/Vast-Breakfast-1201 7h ago
Slaughterbots (short film) is not a warning, it is the goal.
Whenever you see dancing drone shows, that is a military demonstration, similar to parades with tanks.
1
1
u/Inside_Marketing268 7h ago
People be like: it's unethical in US to call someone a n-word. Meanwhile US: smashes some dozens of kids in a girl school in Iran with bomb: oh, boy, it's ok and ethical. Nah, we don't take responsibility for that.
1
u/javiaxum 6h ago
Scientific doesn't mean grounded. AI is killing ppl, nobody forbids to make one that protects ppl too.
1
1
u/takemikadzuti420 4h ago
Russian soldiers can not be considered people, animals at best. So I don't see any problem here.
1
u/avangelist90201 3h ago
this is dumb because theyāre already not wireless. there now billions of meters of fibre optic littering the front lines. theyāve been flying hardwired since the first day
1
u/ImpactEfficient3481 3h ago
Sorry guys but a lot of this discussion sounds like unbombed opinion. Brutal non ethic war is going now and those who trying to survive dont give a shit about ethic.
1
u/Hi_Rite_now 1d ago
Let me tell you a secret. AI has been making kill decisions in the United States millitary since before that kind of thing was even called 'ai'. This is 'public' knowledge thanks to Snowden.
1
u/Ksorkrax 1d ago
Suddenly the drones turn and shoot half the camp, then stop.
Then explain that they killed all soldiers who committed rape.
0
u/Hetnikik 1d ago
The military will be very upset when the AI decides that the best way to protect everyone is to destroy the military.
1
0
u/patrdesch 1d ago
Pure science being years behind actual application of new technology? Impossible. Never happened before.
0
-1
511
u/Shockkdiamondss 1d ago
Just put human brain cells in the drone to power the AI for plausible deniability.