[croes]

Nice try. Unless the military uses potato guns, potatoes aren’t directly involved in killing decisions.

AI is. At first at target selection. Just don’t hope that humans will check the results.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42017085

[phplovesong]

So, do you think countries like russia, iran and china WONT use AI for their military? That train has gone, and its too late now. The US needs (and 110% will) do the exact same, and most likely have been doing so for the last decade.

[croes]

Then they should do it by themselves at least don’t give them the permission.

By doing that they are (at least morally) liable for every damage that will be done.

And of course Russia, China etc. will use it and we consider them the bad guys. Maybe a bad idea to follow their lead if you want to by the good guy.

[valval]

They’re not morally liable any more than the inventors of Kevlar or thermal imaging or the GPS. All technology that is useful for war will be used for war.

[croes]

You have overlooked the point at which use was permitted.

It's one thing if something is used for war but another if you're okay with it.

[chii]

so how far does the indirection have to be for you to find that it isn't "involved"?

Potatoes feed the soldiers, their commanders and their commanders, all the way to the top.

[croes]

As soon as the potato could make you think someone is a killing target.

Take something like this but for kill decisions

https://www.niemanlab.org/2024/09/a-courts-reporter-wrote-ab...

[victorbjorklund]

So you think it is wrong to allow the military to use processors in their computers used in the weapons?

[DrillShopper]

Can you explain how you get that reading from the parent comment?