Comment by ndiddy
8 hours ago
The whole point of Anduril is to create autonomous weapon systems that can kill people autonomously without human involvement. When you look at interviews and speeches that Palmer Luckey has given, they are always deeply unsettling. In a 2024 speech, he said "Societies have always needed a warrior class that is enthused and excited about enacting violence on others in pursuit of good aims. You need people like me who are sick in that way and who don't lose any sleep making tools of violence in order to preserve freedom." ( https://techcrunch.com/2024/10/01/palmer-luckey-every-countr... ). He's said in a Bloomberg interview that "there are actually things I would like to build that the DoD would not use and would not deploy, that they do think are beyond the pale" ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItLFpYha6Wc ), and he's said in an Axios interview that he would be willing to build nuclear weapons, as well as chemical weapons "in a specific vertical". He elaborates by saying that it's a huge mistake that the US military isn't allowed to use tear gas in combat. ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZfW3YTJ5Eg )
Creating “autonomous weapon systems that can kill people without human involvement” is not the whole point of Anduril. That is against SROE which are controlled by the DoW and it’d be a monumental ethical dilemma if this were to be changed.
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.
> Creating “autonomous weapon systems that can kill people without human involvement” is not the whole point of Anduril. That is against SROE which are controlled by the DoW and it’d be a monumental ethical dilemma if this were to be changed.
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.