this post was submitted on 09 Jan 2024
630 points (98.0% liked)
Not The Onion
12368 readers
418 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Comments must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There was at least one that targeted an American born citizen who had defected to some terror organization. US law MIGHT argue he should have been arrested and tried unless he was engaging in active combat at the time. I'm not a lawyer. I just know there were some gray areas with drone use.
as much as i detest mechanized warfare, if dude actually defected to the enemy side and was acting in a combat role (not a medic or other non-com role), then he would have been a legal target.
that being said, drones are a slippery slope to completely removing the human decision making in pulling the trigger to kill someone. eventually, they will have automated targeting on those things, then they'll implement automatic decision making, then they'll implement automatic killing of the target that the drone itself decided was a legitimate target. the problem here is, what are we going to train those drones with? How can we be sure that everyone it kills is actually a combatant?
There's ALREADY auto-targeting. Check out the Phalanx.