Sub-Husker Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Civilian contractors playing key roles in U.S. drone operations http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=144738 . New drone has no pilot anywhere, so who's accountable? http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=144738 Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 I wouldn't swear to it but I'm pretty sure I was controlling one the other night via our PS3 console. Sorry about the unneeded collateral damage. Link to comment
HSKR Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 How would this be any different then when a missile is being fired and something goes wrong? There isn't a guy behind a joystick controlling it either. If we get to the point that the artificial intelligence is allowed to decide what to fire at, then yes, I could see that being a problem. Of course by that point they will have taken over skynet and it will be up to John Conner to save us all. In the immediate future, I would be much more concerned with other countries such as Iran figuring out how to take control of the UAV's and use them against us or civilian targets and then making it look as if we fired on those targets on purpose. Link to comment
Sub-Husker Posted January 29, 2012 Author Share Posted January 29, 2012 How would this be any different then when a missile is being fired and something goes wrong? There isn't a guy behind a joystick controlling it either. If we get to the point that the artificial intelligence is allowed to decide what to fire at, then yes, I could see that being a problem. A misslie is either aimed or targeted my the military, which supposedly has congressional oversight. To fire a weapon requires a direct command by a human in this chain of command. Civilians firing weapons does not have congressional oversight. A program that fires a weapon when a set of parameters is met does not have proper oversight. I would be much more concerned with other countries such as Iran figuring out how to take control of the UAV's and use them against us or civilian targets and then making it look as if we fired on those targets on purpose. To my knowledge this has never happened or even been speculated. Why would this be much more of a concern? Link to comment
HSKR Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 How would this be any different then when a missile is being fired and something goes wrong? There isn't a guy behind a joystick controlling it either. If we get to the point that the artificial intelligence is allowed to decide what to fire at, then yes, I could see that being a problem. A misslie is either aimed or targeted my the military, which supposedly has congressional oversight. To fire a weapon requires a direct command by a human in this chain of command. Civilians firing weapons does not have congressional oversight. A program that fires a weapon when a set of parameters is met does not have proper oversight. I would be much more concerned with other countries such as Iran figuring out how to take control of the UAV's and use them against us or civilian targets and then making it look as if we fired on those targets on purpose. To my knowledge this has never happened or even been speculated. Why would this be much more of a concern? Wasn't that the claim by Iran concerning the downed drone that they hacked the GPS causing it the crash? http://rt.com/usa/ne...ck-stealth-943/ That is if you trust the source. Guess your knowledge has been expanded today. You really seem to contradict yourself when you say you don't trust these things not being controlled by anyone or civilians here and you don't have a concern that an enemy would try to hack them and do what they please with them? I would guess the much bigger threat would be from an enemy if they have the capability. I'm also a little confused with the articles you posted, it was the same one twice. Did you mean to post two separate articles? I didn't find anything in the one you posted that mentioned civilians firing weapons. As I mentioned the first time, I have concerns as well if these things are ever capable to fire without a human pushing the button. Link to comment
JJ Husker Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 Correct me if I'm wrong but don't these civilian operations receive oversight from the military and therefore congressional oversight? Seems I watched some sort of documentary about this very thing and the pilots (basically game playing joystick controllers) were receiving direct military instruction. It seems like a much better option than putting our troops in harms way. Link to comment
walksalone Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 What about the spy satellites 20 years ago? I bet there was minimal military involvement. Just some geeks from Northrop-Grumman taking pictures of Ivan's license plates. Link to comment
carlfense Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 What about the spy satellites 20 years ago? I bet there was minimal military involvement. Just some geeks from Northrop-Grumman taking pictures of Ivan's license plates. That's a good point . . . but only if we are only talking about the unarmed drones. Link to comment
carlfense Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 How would this be any different then when a missile is being fired and something goes wrong? There isn't a guy behind a joystick controlling it either. If we get to the point that the artificial intelligence is allowed to decide what to fire at, then yes, I could see that being a problem. A misslie is either aimed or targeted my the military, which supposedly has congressional oversight. To fire a weapon requires a direct command by a human in this chain of command. Civilians firing weapons does not have congressional oversight. A program that fires a weapon when a set of parameters is met does not have proper oversight. I would be much more concerned with other countries such as Iran figuring out how to take control of the UAV's and use them against us or civilian targets and then making it look as if we fired on those targets on purpose. To my knowledge this has never happened or even been speculated. Why would this be much more of a concern? Wasn't that the claim by Iran concerning the downed drone that they hacked the GPS causing it the crash? http://rt.com/usa/ne...ck-stealth-943/ That is if you trust the source. Guess your knowledge has been expanded today. You really seem to contradict yourself when you say you don't trust these things not being controlled by anyone or civilians here and you don't have a concern that an enemy would try to hack them and do what they please with them? I would guess the much bigger threat would be from an enemy if they have the capability. I'm also a little confused with the articles you posted, it was the same one twice. Did you mean to post two separate articles? I didn't find anything in the one you posted that mentioned civilians firing weapons. As I mentioned the first time, I have concerns as well if these things are ever capable to fire without a human pushing the button. The ability to jam a GPS signal does not necessarily translate to being able to seize control of the aircraft. The latter is far more difficult while the former mostly just requires high powered transmitters. Link to comment
walksalone Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 What about the spy satellites 20 years ago? I bet there was minimal military involvement. Just some geeks from Northrop-Grumman taking pictures of Ivan's license plates. That's a good point . . . but only if we are only talking about the unarmed drones. If they were unarmed spy satellites I'd be willing to bet the only military involvement would be the handing over of the intel. And of the unarmed drones, I'm sure it'd probably be not that different. Link to comment
carlfense Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 What about the spy satellites 20 years ago? I bet there was minimal military involvement. Just some geeks from Northrop-Grumman taking pictures of Ivan's license plates. That's a good point . . . but only if we are only talking about the unarmed drones. If they were unarmed spy satellites I'd be willing to bet the only military involvement would be the handing over of the intel. And of the unarmed drones, I'm sure it'd probably be not that different. Agreed. I'm saying that my opinion of civilian control of drones changes if those are armed drones. Link to comment
walksalone Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 What about the spy satellites 20 years ago? I bet there was minimal military involvement. Just some geeks from Northrop-Grumman taking pictures of Ivan's license plates. That's a good point . . . but only if we are only talking about the unarmed drones. If they were unarmed spy satellites I'd be willing to bet the only military involvement would be the handing over of the intel. And of the unarmed drones, I'm sure it'd probably be not that different. Agreed. I'm saying that my opinion of civilian control of drones changes if those are armed drones. But, would they have civlians doing that job, since the impending troop reduction. Are you gonna train a group of troops to do this, or pay half a dozen guys who already know how to use the system. Not saying it makes it any less right or wrong, just something else to think about Link to comment
carlfense Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 What about the spy satellites 20 years ago? I bet there was minimal military involvement. Just some geeks from Northrop-Grumman taking pictures of Ivan's license plates. That's a good point . . . but only if we are only talking about the unarmed drones. If they were unarmed spy satellites I'd be willing to bet the only military involvement would be the handing over of the intel. And of the unarmed drones, I'm sure it'd probably be not that different. Agreed. I'm saying that my opinion of civilian control of drones changes if those are armed drones. But, would they have civlians doing that job, since the impending troop reduction. Are you gonna train a group of troops to do this, or pay half a dozen guys who already know how to use the system. Not saying it makes it any less right or wrong, just something else to think about Are Air Force personnel numbers going to be reduced? If anything I would imagine that the number of drone pilots is increased. Link to comment
Sub-Husker Posted January 30, 2012 Author Share Posted January 30, 2012 Wasn't that the claim by Iran concerning the downed drone that they hacked the GPS causing it the crash? http://rt.com/usa/ne...ck-stealth-943/ That is if you trust the source. Guess your knowledge has been expanded today. . Your mixing apples and oranges. It was not a false flag attack, they admitted to taking the drone. A false flag would be if they blamed someone else. You really seem to contradict yourself when you say you don't trust these things not being controlled by anyone or civilians here and you don't have a concern that an enemy would try to hack them and do what they please with them? I would guess the much bigger threat would be from an enemy if they have the capability. My preference would be to not use drones as weapons, but better yet would be to not be in stupid wars. I'm also a little confused with the articles you posted, it was the same one twice. Did you mean to post two separate articles? I didn't find anything in the one you posted that mentioned civilians firing weapons. I'll look for the other article. Link to comment
carlfense Posted January 30, 2012 Share Posted January 30, 2012 You really seem to contradict yourself when you say you don't trust these things not being controlled by anyone or civilians here and you don't have a concern that an enemy would try to hack them and do what they please with them? I would guess the much bigger threat would be from an enemy if they have the capability. My preference would be to not use drones as weapons, but better yet would be to not be in stupid wars. I agree about stupid wars . . . but why would you prefer that we not use armed drones? Link to comment
Recommended Posts