Top
Best
New

Posted by devonnull 3 hours ago

Pentagon says overreliance on AI contributed to missile strike on Iran school(www.bloomberg.com)
https://archive.ph/0V37g
309 points | 160 comments
legitster 3 hours ago|
> It found the U.S. “failed in its obligation to do everything feasible to verify” that the school was a military objective and that the failure “went beyond mere negligence.” The report said the United States “directed the strikes at the building of the school while being aware of a substantial risk of striking a civilian object and acting recklessly as regards the possibility that this would happen.”

Reading the details, "AI" doesn't really seem like the culprit -it's a scapegoat.

The intelligence that it was no longer a military target never entered the target database, the team that was responsible for vetting the target list was gutted, and said team was never even consulted.

The White House wanted 1000 targets and pulled from their database without any due diligence. Whether it was an AI call or an SQL query - this was from pure human maliciousness and incompetence.

xlayn 2 hours ago||
Now, ask yourself if you want AI taking decisions around your life... it will pull numbers... someone will have a "goal" of 1000 "hits" and there you go, 2-3 months in jail working to check what went wrong...

But don't worry, the other P AI system will ensure that the first one doesn't do mistakes...

toomuchtodo 1 hour ago|||
Lawsuit Says UnitedHealth Used AI With a 90% Error Rate to Deny Care - https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/lawsuit-says-unitedhe... - September 18th, 2026

UnitedHealth uses AI model with 90% error rate to deny care, lawsuit alleges - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38299921 - November 2023 (58 comments)

https://litigationtracker.law.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uplo...

8note 54 minutes ago|||
what makes ai special here? a person following an SOP that involves polling an incomplete dataset will have the same 2-3 months in jail
jimbooonooo 8 minutes ago|||
The person can be sued for negligent, retaliatory, and otherwise crappy decision making.
stuaxo 16 minutes ago|||
People often tend to stop in these situations.
seizethecheese 2 hours ago|||
Important context is that the notes about the changing use of the location weren’t even in a connected system. Unclear if the human analysts would have even caught this, or if they would have known to check this unconnected system.

> Some US intelligence analysts took notice, the officials said. Bloomberg reported in June that one analyst detected changes to the site as early as 2019, and logged remarks about the modifications in a system that wasn’t connected to the primary military intelligence database, which informs targeting

pbhjpbhj 24 minutes ago||
>"Unclear if the human analysts would have even caught this" (seizethecheese)

At the time a news outlet put out commercially purchased images of the target site before and after -- even a layman could see that it had a children's playground next to the building, and that it was separated from the compound.

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-iran-schoo... has the info from around the time, but doesn't show the detailed images in the news report (video) I seem to remember seeing.

I think it was maybe some earlier coverage from NYT, they published this retrospectively - https://www.nytimes.com/video/world/middleeast/1000000107503... (which is also on YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDcim48W4Io). It shows that even a cursory analysis - without the benefit of enhanced military grade satellite/flyover imagery - indicates the building targeted with pin-point accuracy is a school (eg https://youtu.be/hDcim48W4Io?t=98).

In short, this seems entirely avoidable. I don't think you need any connected system, you just need an image of the target and eyes.

If they trained a model to find targets and didn't train it to avoid civilian targets, and couldn't be bothered to have anyone check them, that's still a war crime. The analyst could probably see the kids playing there with the imaging tech they have available.

This war was unlawfully started by the military at Trump's command, knowing it was not a lawful order; just as they knew firing on shipwrecked civilian sailors was murder. Seemingly it was started to win money betting on fuel prices.

spwa4 1 minute ago||
The discussion is mostly about AI being evil. Humans, even the very large amounts of humans the US military employees, are fundamentally limited in capacity. So the odds of them seeing this sort of image, and canceling the targeting information are approaching a constant (and that constant is not 0)

Now if you ACTUALLY used AI, as opposed to what happened here (Trump stooge getting request for 1000 targets and doing SELECT * FROM targets LIMIT 1000, except getting AI to write the query) could could drive the odds of this happening much closer to zero.

beloch 2 hours ago|||
"In the final days of February, the Trump administration demanded an overwhelming aerial assault. More than 1,000 Iranian targets were hit within the first 24 hours alone. That order compressed the time frame for finalizing targets, the officials said, instilling an urgency that — combined with gaps in underlying information about the site, cuts in civilian-protection personnel and an overreliance on artificial-intelligence technology — set the stage for the deadly error."

-------------------

Maven is an untested tool for rapidly selecting targets under time pressure during a war. It's reason for existing is speed. If you're in a shooting war, the ability to select good military targets faster than your enemy, but not necessarily with zero error, is an advantage.

Planning a first strike is a different situation. Time pressure should not be a significant factor. Humans should have been doing their due diligence on every single target. If an untested tool for rapid mid-battle target selection was relied upon completely because of a hasty executive order, then the responsibility falls entirely on the executive.

cgio 56 minutes ago|||
I think that’s the important distinction. Mistakes under pressure do happen. Unnecessary pressure is not a mistake, though, it’s a crime in this context. They could start planning earlier or commit to action later.
pbhjpbhj 18 minutes ago||||
Well the order wasn't lawful, Congress hadn't countenanced a war.

Unfortunately the military all turned their backs on their oath to uphold the constitution (Again! Deploying against USA cities and kidnapping foreign heads-of-state at the whim of Trump is also not lawful). At that point it is hard to see how your democracy can be resurrected.

rurp 5 minutes ago|||
Great point. Less deadly but just as incompetent was the utter failure to refill the Strategic Petroleum Reserve when gas was cheap for a year leading up to this war of choice; a war that was certain to massively disrupt global energy markets. Energy disruptions had been an obvious consequence to every expert and non-expert who had looked at attacking Iran for decades. Yet the people who chose to start the war managed to be caught completely off guard by that.

Just like clowns in charge were caught off guard by the fact that Iran has a drone program, resulting in the loss of dozens of air frames and much of our strategic munition stockpiles. Iran literally jump started Russia's drone program in a high profile way, and yet trump/hegseth somehow completely failed to plan for how to counter those drones and had to resort to lobbing scarce multi-million interceptor missiles at them and watching our bases take heavy damage.

These are just some of the failures we know about. The administration has been extremely tight lipped about these failures and there are surely many more that aren't common knowledge. Who knows how many hundreds of other children have been needlessly killed outside of the school strike.

jmathai 2 hours ago|||
Seems like a scenario where two completely avoidable wrongs....killed 120 children. AI being one of the wrongs.
jauntywundrkind 2 hours ago|||
"A computer can never be held accountable / Therefore a computer must must never make a management decision" https://simonwillison.net/2025/Feb/3/a-computer-can-never-be...

Except laundering our biases & discriminations, the unaccountability seems to be the purpose of a huge huge swarth of AI usage. To eliminate accountability. That sure seems like A Feature Not A Bug to the worlds worst people.

bix6 3 hours ago|||
https://www.propublica.org/article/hegseth-civilian-harm-mit...
legitster 2 hours ago||
> “No more politically correct and overbearing rules of engagement,” - Hegseth

...

> Hegseth and the commander in charge of the Iran operation, Adm. Brad Cooper, were questioned about the strike before Congress. Hegseth said the U.S. does not target civilians and would investigate

So the administration does not intentionally target civilians, they have just stopped caring about who a civilian is.

andrepd 2 hours ago|||
Well Israel has defined "combatant" as "male between 14 and 55", and the Western world more or less shrugged and moved on without missing a beat. I'm not optimistic.
ceejayoz 2 hours ago|||
That, unfortunately, originates more from the US than Israel.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military-age_male

YZF 1 hour ago|||
[flagged]
ceejayoz 1 hour ago||
The accepted answer here has a decent source:

https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/56556/does-the-...

> fight in civilian clothing

(Fake) physician, heal thyself.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/israeli-undercover-forces...

> Article 4 applies to soldiers (that e.g. fight in uniform)

Israel openly forbids the importation of uniforms.

https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/israel-seizes-la...

noncoml 2 hours ago|||
Not sure wtf “politically correct” in the context of rules of engagement even means.

What a fucking moron

cogman10 2 hours ago||
Instead of worrying about woke things like "is this person actually a combatant actively fighting" they want the much simpler rule of "everyone we kill was actually a terrorist that deserves to die".

Basically they stopped caring those woke UN rules about war crimes.

michaelmrose 2 hours ago||
[dead]
colingauvin 3 hours ago||
While I think that it's important to do root cause analysis, we need to be very careful not to absolve blame from the people that decided to shift a significant weight of decision-making authority to an AI. An AI can't be tried in a court. There has to be a responsible human for everyone one of its actions, especially when it's killing (-people-) children.

I cannot believe this has come to pass.

ceejayoz 3 hours ago||
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/03/10/pentagon-iran-schoo...

> The Pentagon chief last year slashed offices that didn’t contribute to his goal of “lethality,” including the group that assists in limiting risk to civilians, known as the Civilian Protection Center of Excellence. Around 200 employees who worked on the issue, including at that office, have been reduced by about 90 percent, according to two current and former officials and a person familiar with the effort. The team that handles civilian casualties at Central Command, which oversees the Middle East, has dropped from 10 to one.

Negligent homicide in pursuit of their DEI goals, basically.

stuaxo 3 hours ago||
Do you just chuck that on the end of any sentence, because this makes less sense than an LLM.
ceejayoz 3 hours ago||
People were killed, i.e. homicide.

Negligence was involved.

DEI for drunk white men who look good on TV got us Hegseth, who's now rather hilariously requiring gender-affirming treatment for the troops. (https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/pentagon-moves-forward-wi...)

shepherdjerred 1 hour ago|||
Taking AI out of the equation, surely these same kinds of mistakes have been made in the recent past. As in, not doing due diligence and mistakenly killing civilians

(setting aside when civilians are purposefully harmed which is a conversation about morals rather than the capability to make correct decisions)

What I am getting at is, has AI really made the problem worse or has the mechanism just changed?

aDyslecticCrow 58 minutes ago||
We are increasingly seeing "Sorry out <Black box> made a mistake, the developers are fixing it" rather than any one person taking responsibility for the decision. This is a growing problem that is made worse by AI. Over-inflated trust in AI output is also documented issue; "The perfect billion dollar targeting system with a 99.9% success-rate (on its verification dataset)" just made a "fluke"; "Nothing could have stopped this tragedy"

When it was just called a "database query" or "algorithmic estimation", it was more implied that the actual decision is left to be made and that no analysis had actually been done yet. But when AI preemptively says "I've analyzed every source of data and come to the conclusion that this ship is carrying nuclear bomb material"; it really sounds urgent doesn't it? It probably doubled down when asked about it.

https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/18/politics/us-military-ai-f...

dmix 2 hours ago|||
The headline says "contributed to missile strike", not caused it.
colingauvin 29 minutes ago||
>people that decided to shift a significant weight of decision-making authority to an AI

And I hedged that. Anything short of 100% responsibility with humans is a failure. I get investigating how it occurred, but that needs be very careful to separate ought from is.

dmix 27 minutes ago||
That's fair

The obvious questions is when the intelligence needed to be updated (ie, when Iran decided to put a girls school on a military base) and when Iran made that fact public, or at least when the US intel should have figured it out with satellites and other sources.

If it's years old then definitely on human. Intelligence will always be flaky in these hostile countries.

jacquesm 3 hours ago||
can -> can't
colingauvin 1 hour ago|||
ty, fixed
teekert 3 hours ago|||
https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/cannot-vs-can-not-is...
Jtsummers 3 hours ago||
He's referring to this sentence:

> An AI can be tried in a court.

An AI can't be tried in a court.

imranq 3 hours ago||
> Officials said some users expected Maven to flag stale records or contradictions in the intelligence assembled for potential targets, though it is not clear why they thought the system would do that

This is what happens when people who don't understand AI and its limitations embrace it wholeheartedly, thinking it's going to behave like The ultimate analyst. Except it's not. Its got blind spots in more places than anyone knows. And not to mention the system itself has multiple areas of failure.

pants2 2 hours ago||
Chatbots in general can be quite opaque in how they operate, the biggest issue with agent products is communicating it's capabilities and limitations to users. If you have a bank app it's pretty clear whether or not it can send wire transfers, but a if that's a chatbot, users will have to think to ask it (and even then it could hallucinate)
shimman 2 hours ago||
No, this is what happens when software developers don't understand how users actually use their products.

This was a totally expected outcome, similar to how CV cameras arrest the wrong minorities in neighboring states 100s of miles away because it told the officer it was them; or how health insurance companies use ML algorithms to deny Americans care.

It's going to happen in other sectors of life and it will continue killing innocent civilians.

banubis 3 hours ago||
The pentagon says it was Palantir software’s fault, Palantir says it was the fault of bad data input to their software. Where’s the accountability by both organizations? How did we get to a world where military decisions leading to innocent deaths are responded to as if it was just another miscommunication implementing a B2B SaaS platform.
gambiting 2 hours ago||
To me it's extremely obvious that this is the desired outcome - no accountability for anyone with this setup.
testing22321 1 hour ago|||
This is the same response they’ll have when the AI launches nukes and starts annihilating the human race. No accountability till the end.
hyperhello 3 hours ago|||
Small children often develop coping mechanisms for their lack of agency. It may be part of these people’s worldview since early childhood that anyone who opposes them should magically die.
paimapi 1 hour ago||
*anti-social coping mechanisms

you can also develop pro-social coping mechanisms like open-mindedly talking to someone who opposes you and trying to understand their worldview because you trust that it might expand your own

but, yeah, I doubt pro-social traits are common at the top of any hyperstrict hierarchical organization like the USAF

augment_me 2 hours ago||
The new world is complex and AI technology has outpaced the regulation cycle, so it's inevitable that we come to a place where you don't have accountability and can never have it because 0) the courts can't handle the case, they don't have the frameworks for it, so it takes longer time 1) you can overload the courts with slop, 2) by the time there is a decision the world has moved on and technology has moved on

Really good time to do various crime.

croon 2 hours ago|||
I disagree with this framing. Nothing in accountability has really changed other than our willingness to enforce it.

Replace "AI" with any other tool or software in your scenario, and the outcome is the same. The same people and organizations are accountable, it's just that we currently live in a world without accountability in the highest places where it's most needed, and that's unrelated to AI.

augment_me 1 hour ago|||
You disagree that there is no difference between the amount of material you can generate today compared to 10 years ago?

Or with that the EU AI Act has been redundant and postponed in 2023 because it was drafted on ResNets, and then redundant and postponed in 2025 because it was drafted on ChatGPT 3.5, and then this year probably again because it didn't have agents included?

Or with that other countries that getting their companies hacked by AI models are ignoring any kind of prosecution of said companies and delegating this to the US?

forshaper 1 hour ago|||
Yeah, all this was going on decades before AI.
s5300 25 minutes ago|||
[dead]
jmathai 3 hours ago||
> The Minab site, which was cataloged as an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps facility due to outdated data, was fed into Maven with other candidates and came out as a recommended day-one target. Target-list work that once took hours was condensed into minutes.

I feel like we're optimizing the wrong metric here.

seizethecheese 2 hours ago|
Even ignoring the risk of civilian casualties (which to be clear should be weighed heavily) it’s just bad ROI. Like each missile probably costs more than the extra targeting work they should have done.
ambicapter 2 hours ago||
probably -> definitely

These missiles cost a couple million each.

seizethecheese 2 hours ago||
Yeah, totally, I’m being cautious because I don’t know how large the team is that would spend a few more hours, but under most assumptions you’re right.
macintux 3 hours ago||
Related: the U.S. nearly boarded a Chinese boat that AI incorrectly flagged as carrying nuclear weapons materiel.

https://gizmodo.com/almost-started-a-war-us-military-nearly-...

seizethecheese 2 hours ago|
This is actually a much bigger close call than the hugging face incident. A hallucination almost triggered a possible precursor to WWIII.
Zigurd 3 hours ago||
You're absolutely right, those were innocent children. I apologize for the error. Would you like to know more about war crimes?
onlyrealcuzzo 3 hours ago||
Wait... I thought they said they didn't kill children and that was Iranian propaganda.

> That didn't happen.

> And if it did, it wasn't that bad.

> And if it was, it was AI's fault, not mine.

nilamo 2 hours ago|||
I'll add a check that all individuals within are genuinely adults to avoid this.
ceejayoz 3 hours ago||
C'mon, a Palantir AI isn't gonna talk like Claude.

It's gonna say something like "they were all military-aged males". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military-age_male

impossiblefork 3 hours ago||
Personally I'm more interested in the justification for the second and third strikes.

There needs to be some protection for first responders and others helping the injured.

FireBeyond 2 hours ago|
Israel likes to argue that Hamas embeds fighters with first responders, which even if so, they're still responding to injured. But Israel considers this not even collateral damage but justified.

Mind you Israel is currently funding a lobbyist organization in the UK to flag Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) as a terrorist group (because many years ago a couple of people who had affiliations with other anti-Israel groups were found to be also affiliated with MSF).

impossiblefork 2 hours ago|||
Yeah, I've heard about it, but presumable Americans soldiers still care about IHL at least to some degree, even though they've historically not bothered with the Geneva convention and have tortured people.
FireBeyond 34 minutes ago||||
Responding here to answer the dead comment which feels entirely disingenuous.

No-one mentioned "using ambulances as cover". That is separate from "enemy combatants are acting in a first responder capacity, but are still enemy combatants, therefore the entire first response effort is a viable target". That is a war crime that Israel regularly likes to commit.

> These are the same people who view women as property, homosexuality as a reason for execution, and 13 years olds as viable brides.

Halacha? Acquiring your wife through kiddushin? Only a husband can issue a get (divorce document)? Women in agunahs (dead marriages)? Sounds like property to me.

Rabbinic law makes capital punishment effectively impossible, but the Orthodox sects do everything possible to punish: disownment, both family and social and actual exile from physical communities.

Don't girls reach halachic adulthood at 12?

And lets not throw stones here. Even in the US, you can get married with parental consent or a judge's consent at any age in Mississippi, New Mexico and Oklahoma.

You can get married at 15 in Hawaii and Kansas.

You are "grandfathered" into sexual consent (not as in "marital rape" but "no longer statutory rape") when you do so.

So we may not want to be lording it too much on some guise of moral superiority, particularly given that most of the marriages that happen at those ages are not "young couple got pregnant, want to do the right thing" but "older man in conservative/religious community saw young vulnerable girl and decided he had to have her".

WarmWash 2 hours ago|||
[flagged]
feurio 17 minutes ago||
"Proteus! You just killed 123 schoolgirls, you sick mofo!"

"You're absolutely right."

63 2 hours ago|
It's easy to blame the military and the higher-ups, after all they made this choice. But more relevant to HN, this couldn't have happened without technology professionals working for Palantir.

> A Palantir spokesperson told Bloomberg the company “is not responsible for the underlying data nor identifying intelligence deficiencies” and that there is no evidence its software was at fault.

If you work for Palantir, you are writing software that kills people. Software that, in this case, killed 123 children. What salary is worth that?

I encourage others who work in the public sector, whether directly or through a contractor, to read and internalize Don't Get Distracted by Caleb Hearth [0]. I think about it nearly every day.

[0] https://calebhearth.com/dont-get-distracted

PorciiVorbesc 2 hours ago||
>It's easy to blame the military and the higher-ups

My brother in Cthulu, they're the ones making the life or death decision that killed people, who else should be to blame?

>But more relevant to HN, this couldn't have happened without technology professionals working for Palantir.

If you wanna go the historical tech-tree scapegoat route then none of this would have happened if DARPA wouldn't have invented the internet, or if Thomas Edison wouldn't have invented the lightbulb, or if the fish haven't ventured onto land and evolve into us land mammal apes who invented sharpened sticks as murder objects.

cogman10 2 hours ago|||
Look, if Palantir had any redeeming qualities then I might agree with you. Unlike electricity which runs our computers, homes, cars, etc. What does Palantir do? It spies on people and helps governments to create "people we don't like" lists. In the absolute best case it's a "minority report" engine, but it's still just there to try and stop pre-crime (not crime).

This isn't the case where we are talking about a company doing anything socially good. It's simply there to help authoritarian governments.

PorciiVorbesc 2 hours ago||
Palantir only exists because government wants and funds these types of tools. If it Palantir wouldn't exist then another dozen companies with different names would exist that would create the same Torment Nexus for the government due to inexhaustible demand for such tools.

>It's simply there to help authoritarian governments.

The fact that you're so close yet so far away to figuring out who's to blame still boggles my mind.

smackeyacky 1 hour ago||
Are you implying that the demand for these evil services absolves the suppliers from any moral responsibility? Simply because “if we don’t do this somebody else will”.

It’s an evil service and no matter who requests it or supplies it, doing so is an evil act.

PorciiVorbesc 59 minutes ago|||
>Are you implying that the demand for these evil services absolves the suppliers from any moral responsibility?

No, you are. I'm implying evil are (primarily) those who use it, not (just) those who make it. You can try to make whatever you want, if nobody will buy it, then you won't have money to make it. Palantir only exists because governments are evil and willing to buy it. If you want Palantir to not exist you need to hold your government accountable.

Are gun makers evil and responsible whenever someone gets killed by a murderer, or are those who pull the trigger responsible?

cogman10 33 minutes ago|||
> Are gun makers evil and responsible whenever someone gets killed by a murderer, or are those who pull the trigger responsible?

Yes. There's a reason Remington decided to settle for $73M dollars with the sandyhook parents even though they didn't "pull the trigger" [1]. That's not a number you pick because you think you'll win the case.

[1] https://abcnews.com/US/sandy-hook-families-settle-remington-...

PorciiVorbesc 22 minutes ago||
>There's a reason Remington decided to settle for $73M dollars with the sandyhook parents

It's only because of how the legal system works in the US, with ambulance chasing lawyer and where cases are decided on the emotions and societal moral panics of the people in the jury and negative image such cases can cause to a brand, not if someone is objectively right or wrong.

Meaning it's cheaper to pay people off even if they're legally wrong, than try to prove you are right but then deal with the bad publicity of the mob with pitchforks and torches who blames you for their kids dying and looks bad in the media.

Keep in mind parents of that time also blamed violent videogames like Doom for it, so it's not like they were right about who was to blame, they were just looking for retribution from anyone they could aided by ambulance chasing lawyers looking to cash in.

smackeyacky 52 minutes ago|||
I absolutely knew you’d bring up guns and gun making but it’s not a valid comparison. If the gun companies were also involved in the actual shooting of people part that would work.

Palantir were in no way obliged or coerced into making an evil thing, they just decided being evil for money was ok.

8note 21 minutes ago|||
its clearly a democratically approved legal act though. If its as evil as you suggest, the better approach would be to convince your peers that its evil and thus should be made illegal
smackeyacky 10 minutes ago||
Again, absolving the company that built it and runs it. They weren’t coerced into doing so and must share the blame for the evil that was created.
whatshisface 2 hours ago|||
I know, right? I'm not even sure if this is the biggest installation on Earth. If it's possible for us, it's possible for any number of private military contractors. I bet there's a similar capability in the hands of every advanced county on Earth. Anyway, shaddup, the focusing crystal's not calibrating right, and tomorrow I have present the targeting parameters to Dr. Evil.
stanac 1 hour ago|||
Thank you for sharing the talk.

> I encourage others who work in the public sector, whether directly or through a contractor, to read and internalize Don't Get Distracted by Caleb Hearth.

I know a guy who works for well-known hardware company. He isn't a software dev, but close enough, works with Verilog on hardware design and verification. One day he tells me how he is working on video processing module and he doesn't know if that module will be part of surveillance system, missile guidance or nanny cam. It's possible that even middle management doesn't know more than him, and very likely the module will find uses in multiple products. He is a small cogs in a large machine, maybe his work will save a baby's life, maybe it will kill a person, he cannot know.

asdff 3 minutes ago||
Well, at least there are definitely jobs in hardware and software where you can in fact be 100% sure what you build won't kill another person. Surveillance, Missile guidance, and nanny cams though? What, does he work for Honeywell or something?
GuB-42 2 hours ago|||
Of course it could have happened. You don't even need targeting for this to happen. You can drop bombs at random and kill whoever is unlucky enough to be in the wrong place. The US has a long history of doing it (Japan, Vietnam, ...).

So yeah, the military and whoever decided that a war was a good idea are to blame.

People working at Palantir are as much responsible for the killing of these 123 children than seatbelt manufacturers are responsible for the people who died because their product failed. That is, because they didn't do their job correctly, people died, definitely worth feeling bad about. However, should people stop working in seatbelt manufacturing because of it? Absolutely not, we need seatbelts, because without them, things would be worse.

Palantir, or whoever does target identification, is like the seatbelt of the reckless drivers of the militaries, who, for the lack of precise information, would just carpet bomb the place. It is not a hypothetical, it is how the US has worked before they had precision ammunition.

This is essentially a trolley problem. The war is the trolley, people who work for Palantir are the ones pulling levers. And if there is no one to pull the lever, the trolley is gong on a track with a lot of people on it.

augment_me 2 hours ago|||
The govt is investing in the military whether you like it or not, there is a set amount of GDP going into the sector regardless of your moral choice.

Would you rather not have someone make good software that does not misidentify schools at sites? Or should we outsource this to worse engineers who don't care about morals and don't find this metric meaningful?

kelnos 1 hour ago||
That's a reasonable argument, but I don't think I could make the decision to work on software that's designed to kill people. I consider myself a pretty good software developer, and yes, I could probably do a better job building software to help kill people than many others, but I don't think "if you don't do it, someone less capable will, and more innocent people will get killed" would sway me. I just don't want to be involved in that, and I'm lucky that I don't have to be.
augment_me 1 hour ago||
Well you made a personal choice to stick your head in the sand to not have to deal with the hard emotions, and that's fine. But to then pass judgement on people who don't sounds a bit unfair given this.
gameshot911 2 hours ago|||
If I write healthcare software, and a doctor orders the wrong drug that kills the patient, am I responsible?
kelnos 1 hour ago|||
It depends. Did you write a bug that caused the wrong drug to get ordered? Did you design or implement an algorithm that recommends drugs, and the algorithm was a bad one? Did you design or implement a confusing UI flow that led to the doctor ordering the wrong drug?

If so, I'd say yes, you share some of the responsibility. Legally, I'm sure you'd be fine, but if that were me, I'd feel responsible.

The doctor of course is responsible too; they're the one who didn't double-check that it was an appropriate drug. But multiple people can share responsibility for a bad thing.

ekzy 2 hours ago|||
Legally, probably not...?

Whether you may/should feel responsible depends on how the software works, I guess. Did it automatically recommend some drug, somewhat confidently, with gray text on gray background saying "AI sometimes makes mistakes"?

So I think we should behave responsibly when making software, even more now with AI

petre 2 hours ago||
Let's not forget the shareholders who invested in this company knowing what they do. That includes some of my colleagues. I told them that whoever created and named this company is clearly a psycho.
More comments...