upvote
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.

reply
Do you just chuck that on the end of any sentence, because this makes less sense than an LLM.
reply
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...)

reply
The headline says "contributed to missile strike", not caused it.
reply
>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.

reply
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.

reply
> when Iran decided to put a girls school on a military base

That's quite common. The US DOD operates 163 K-12 schools.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W.T._Sampson_Elementary/High_S...

In this case:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/3/3/questions-over-minab...

> The findings reveal that the school had been clearly separate from an adjacent military site for at least 10 years.

reply
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?

reply
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...

reply
can -> can't
reply
ty, fixed
reply
reply
He's referring to this sentence:

> An AI can be tried in a court.

An AI can't be tried in a court.

reply