Re: [FT] Unpredictable AI

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, David Griffin wrote:

> > When a cruise missile is launched and it destroys a
> > milk powder factory,
> > it is a fault of the decision makers/intel people,
> > and actions can be
> > taken to prevent this. If a drone decides a nice fat
> > Airbus is hostile,
> > it's a different matter entirely. I'd rather trust
> > fallible humans than a
> > piece of software with those decisions.
> > 
> Yes I understand the distinction, but it is one of
> degree, not kind, at least in my opinion.
> 
> Yes, it's harder to program the drone to not shoot
> down the airbus, but still there is a judgement
> and/or discretion with a manned unit not present in
> a robot (at present).

You mean a remote controller? BIG problem there is suspectibility to EW.

> A manned fighter would (probably) not shoot down
> the airbus, even if it registered on his radar as
> a hostile. A manned bomber would probably not bomb
> a target which is obviously an error (big white
> building with a red cross). 

True.
 
> Fighter missions would probably be somewhat more
> nebulous (wild weasel, aircraft escort, close
> air support, air superiority, and so on) than
> a bomber's mission would be, but even bomber crews
> have some judgement to exercise. That judgement
> is missing in a cruise missile, but we're willing
> to sacrifice that for the safety of our pilots in
> SOME kinds of missions.

True.
 
> Perhaps drone fighters would only be assigned 
> missions in areas where no airbusses were expected
> (say the middle of Iraq during the gulf war where
> there should be no civilian targets). Maybe you
> give them simple roles like circle at this location
> looking for the following silhouettes only. If you
> see them (maybe they are the silhouettes for cruise
> missiles the enemy uses), shoot intercepts.

I'll go along with that. This still leads to the conclusion that drones
would be an addition to the arsenal, allowing possibly for a reduction
in
fighters, but not a replacement.

> I like a man in the loop too, but speaking as the 
> son of an Air Force navigator on B52's, I'm not sure
> I want my dad over the target unless he has to be
> there to exercise that judgement.

Of course. But this applies to having anyone in the line of fire,
anywhere. 

Cheers,

   Derk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine

iD8DBQE7MhBGJXH58oo6ncURAtBvAJ9/hst3Ingbtl/SOXu1E/O/YwAr8wCfS/L8
EkuBeMVJc9Sl8CGrkHN1OdE=
=Iv5n