Also, Palmer is one of many Anduril co-founders, and is not the acting CEO. His opinions are an input but are not ground truth for the company. He has effectively been a marketing figurehead for years.
Please stop spreading disinformation. If people engaged with defense technology and ethics in defense with more earnest curiosity, we’d have more productive dialogue and a less polarized tech community.
From a 60 Minutes interview Luckey did last year ( https://www.cbsnews.com/news/palmer-luckey-ai-powered-autono... ):
> Right now, there are so many weapon systems that require manning. You know, if I can have one guy command and controlling 100 aircraft, that's a lot easier than having to have a pilot in every single one. And it puts a lot fewer American lives at risk.
> To be clear, "autonomy" does not mean remote controlled.
> Once an autonomous weapon is programmed and given a task, it can use artificial intelligence for surveillance or to identify, select and engage targets. No operator needed.
> If you were having to require the human operator to actually map every single action and say, "Hey, do this. If that, then this." It would take so long to manage it that you would be better off just remotely piloting it. It's the AI onboard all these weapons that makes it possible to make it so easy.
To me that seems like he's describing a system where you give it a task like "kill all the insurgents in X area" and it'll go and do it without needing an operator.
> Also, Palmer is one of many Anduril co-founders, and is not the acting CEO. His opinions are an input but are not ground truth for the company. He has effectively been a marketing figurehead for years.
If the company's really good at heart, I'm not sure they would have kept a guy who keeps telling the media that the company is working on autonomous weapons to kill people without requiring an operator, and that he's frustrated that he can't make what he REALLY wants to because of all the pesky war crime treaties.