Re: [FT] Unpredictable AI

Allan Goodall wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 15:17:17 +0200 (CEST), Derk Groeneveld
<derk@cistron.nl>
> wrote:
>
> >Besides, is it truly politically acceptable NOT to have a human in
the
> >loop of a weapon of (mass?) destruction? Do you think it will BECOME
> >acceptable?
>
> Now, THAT is a really good question. I think right now it isn't
acceptable. I
> think it will become acceptable.
>
> I'm not sure why I think this, except that during World War II Britain
used
> woman to "man" anti-aircraft guns. For most of the war, women could do
> anything involved in shooting the guns except one thing: pulling the
lanyard.
> In other words, women could track an aircraft, load the weapon, aim
the
> weapon, prepare the weapon for firing, but it was considered
"inappropriate"
> for a woman to the pull the trigger and kill a man.

I am not so sure.  There were searchlight units composed entirely of
women (except
for the not-publicised, hairless gorilla that started the deisel
generator with
the hand-crank)[Ian V. Hogg's Air Defence (?)].  The shells for the 3.7"
anti-aircraft gun were not light, and hand training the gun required a
fair amount
of upper body strength to do with any speed, so pulling the lanyard
would be the
only task that the were suited for.  Manning the predictor is okay, but
towards
the end of the war, it was all done electro-mechanically.  Even Israel
stopped
using woman in many combat positions once the statistically inevitable
happened
and maimed women were invalided home.

You weren't thinking of that "Carry On" movie about the first integrated
AAA