Thread

1. legitster · 1790105097 · focus · HN ↗

   > 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.

   1. skew-aberration · 1790123166 · focus · HN ↗

      This seems like a meaningless distinction to me. 'Overreliance on AI' implies the humans relied on the AI too much. You aren't even disagreeing with the article.

      1. shevy-java · 1790124125 · focus · HN ↗

         No, that's not what the poster wrote. See this part:

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

         So the analysis was that AI has been a scapegoat. That's correct.

         The implication is that it was indeed HUMANS who made the decision, and now the US government tries to shift away the blames from their decision onto "AI made a mistake, not we did". It is just not logical to assume this was a mistake in the age of mass surveillance and sniffing on everyone at all times.

         1. skew-aberration · 1790124802 · focus · HN ↗

            Are we reading the same article?

            GP says AI is not the culprit, but that actually agrees with the article + headline - which also blame the humans. Nobody in the article is scapegoating AI at all.

            If you are both referring to some other claims by US gov made elsewhere (none are in the article), it might be useful to cite them.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.