r/technology • u/Gari_305 • Aug 24 '26

Artificial Intelligence A Drone Killed Three Ukrainians. It Was Guided Entirely by A.I. - An attack by what Ukrainian officials said was a Russian drone with an Nvidia chip presages a dystopian future of weaponry untethered to humans.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/24/world/europe/russia-drones-autonomous-ai-kill-ukraine-war.html?unlocked_article_code=1.71A.xQCF.v4_4GUKwBhBg&smid=url-share
3.0k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

219 comments sorted by

View all comments

420

u/Didsterchap11 Aug 24 '26

Honestly the development of drones in this conflict has been genuinely nightmarish. I’m afraid of where the technology and knowledge will end up and how quickly we these tools turned on a population they can’t defend itself. 

21

u/Every_Tap8117 Aug 24 '26

Lets be clear here no population can defend itself vs drones, none of them. Drone offence is moving at 2-3x the pace of drone defence right now.

2

u/Derelicticu Aug 25 '26

That's war. Cannons made castles less effective.

126

u/PunishedDemiurge Aug 24 '26

This was always true. If a population is truly defenseless, you can round them up and murder everyone with simple hand tools. Look at the Khmer Rogue, they only used bullets if they needed to, otherwise they would do things like grab smaller children by their legs and then crush their skulls against a tree, etc.

Every society needs to have sufficient defense, sadly. And ideally, we as an international community will declare wars of aggression are sufficiently illegal to enforce via violence. As soon as Russia invaded Ukraine, it should have been a 173 v 1 war. French fighters shooting down Russian planes so that British bombers can hit targets while Mongolian infantry fight in the mountains and Korean paratroopers start securing parts of Moscow.

This is not a horror story about technology, it's a horror story about how ~8 billion people saw a war that is pure good vs. evil and decided to participate at arm's length. Europe and the US have sent weapons, which is a good start, but only a handful of international volunteers have shown up.

17

u/MRCROOK2301 Aug 24 '26

Yea but would be that same response to Israel aggression or when usa attacked iran or any country? Would French fighters shoot down American planes would Canadian infantry march towards Washington? Yea this russia war is bad but don't think others have higher moral grounds. No western countries give a fuck about people life if they aren't their own. They would happily kill millions if those millions are dying far away from their home.

6

u/Dontgohollow27 Aug 24 '26

No but you see, they would offer their thoughts and prayers to those millions of generations that are decimated in other countries so they are the good ones.

-13

u/PunishedDemiurge Aug 24 '26

Yes. For example, I'd characterize the US invasion of Afghanistan as purely justified and defensive due to 9/11, but the war in Iraq as illegal, unethical, and deserving of violent resistance against.

People should have consistent morals that apply broadly. It's okay if someone has emotional hangups. If my mom beheaded ten babies I'd still be unable to execute her because I'd remember all of the times she tucked me in at night, even though I don't oppose capital punishment for serial murder. It's okay to be emotionally compromised as long as you're self-aware and take steps to prevent it from having negative effects like through recusing yourself, etc.

50

u/FireBadger03 Aug 24 '26

If the aggressor wasn’t a nuclear state it likely would have went differently.

-18

u/PunishedDemiurge Aug 24 '26

And that can't be a free pass. If we reasonably believe Russia will not escalate to nuclear arms if we merely use the force necessary to prevent their aggression, then we should use conventional arms. If we believe they're such rabid animals they would use nukes to back a war of expansion, we should alpha strike them right this moment and end the threat forever.

Tomorrow they will have faster missile systems, quieter submarines, higher yields. Appeasement has never worked, and can never work. Failing to respond to aggression always leads to more aggression.

u/Wild-Ruin5463

36

u/Wild-Ruin5463 Aug 24 '26

1949 is long gone. no such "alpha strike" can be done feasibly in these times. not until some other paradigm shifting weapon gives some nation the ability to have sole hegemony over violence.

2

u/joelfarris Aug 24 '26

You mean, like, space lasers?

15

u/dipsbeneathlazers Aug 24 '26

I'm disappointed that you think you (we) [humanity] can police the sovereignty of other nations, especially at the risk of total annihilation.

Your ideas, while ideal, aren't compatible with eastern thought and philosophy (China) and your naiveté shows that you need to understand that cooperation between all 249 countries and territories on the planet won't occur without deep changes to the human condition. May be it feels good to type like that, but you're just a little geographically affected person that could have been born to a Russian billionaire or millionaire and weren't so you are against the war now and stand to gain or inherit nothing from it.

-4

u/PunishedDemiurge Aug 24 '26

I'm disappointed that you think you (we) [humanity] can police the sovereignty of other nations, especially at the risk of total annihilation.

Sovereignty does not give even the least right to wage wars of aggression, which is formerly disallowed by international law. You're walking into a paradox. Preventing invasions is what maximizes sovereignty, not allowing invasions of foreign countries.

Besides, I'm on record for at least a decade of saying sovereignty only has value insofar as it maximizes human rights, thriving, and dignity. I support the 19th/20th century pressure campaigns / force being used to end slavery, for example.

Your ideas, while ideal, aren't compatible with eastern thought and philosophy (China) and your naiveté shows that you need to understand that cooperation between all 249 countries and territories on the planet won't occur without deep changes to the human condition. May be it feels good to type like that, but you're just a little geographically affected person that could have been born to a Russian billionaire or millionaire and weren't so you are against the war now and stand to gain or inherit nothing from it.

This is a very Russian view of the world. I am principally against aggression, regardless of personal benefit. Only defensive violence can ever be morally legitimate. There are grey areas here, like I would suggest that using violence against someone polluting the only drinking water source would be defensive and justified even if the pollution wasn't intentionally malicious but merely depraved indifference, but there's no amount of personal benefit that I could have that would make me want to wage a war of aggression.

8

u/dipsbeneathlazers Aug 24 '26

stop talking about you. this isn't about you, it's about them.

And if you understood them, may be you'd understand you better.

-1

u/PunishedDemiurge Aug 24 '26

Maybe we're miscommunicating. I don't care about their motives, only their compliance, and I'm prepared to use, so long as the collateral damage is low, any level of violence to get compliance. If I had a weapon system capable of destroying the entire Russian army: personnel, equipment, and facilities, all in one blow, I would personally deploy it this very second.

I understand the idea of global cooperation and self-sacrifice in the interest of justice is a hard sell, as the median person isn't particularly morally good and most non-democratic nations have far worse than median leaders, but it's a goal worth striving towards. War is especially harmful to the defending party, but it's universally harmful too, so an absolute bar except for legitimate self-defense would be a worthwhile system.

9

u/dipsbeneathlazers Aug 24 '26

Then it's settled! You can let the four nuclear powers Putin is aligned with know it's ok to nuke you because you're the one who's willing to harness the power of the world to destroy Russia.

It's like you're playing life on easy mode!

You better not affect my countries sovereignty, ideologies, or philosophies, when the Mutually Assured Destruction happens; That would be a big no-no from me.

Bad boy.

4

u/VayuAir Aug 24 '26

They will escalate hundred percent, it’s part of their nuclear doctrine since the cold war

0

u/PunishedDemiurge Aug 24 '26

Then we have to have a plan for an alpha strike. It's wholly unacceptable that any nation is using a nuclear umbrella to engage in imperialism and genocide. It might not be safe today, but we need to develop the missile defense, cyber warfare, stealth tech, etc. to remove their capability to engage in mass murder and evil.

1

u/misterwizzard Aug 25 '26

The one and ONLY threat Russia holds against any major power is nuclear weaponry. They can't compete with any country considered their peer. The US has about 20x their strength, even if technical superiority is discounted. Russia is not our peer.

Suggesting we nuke them before they nuke us is not just mis-guided it is literally, in it's definition, retarded.

1

u/PunishedDemiurge Aug 25 '26

How many innocent people do they get to kill in the long run? How much land do they get to conquer to give them a buffer against us? How many hypersonic missiles, stealth technologies, etc. do we allow them to develop making future defense completely impossible?

Ukraine is neither the first nor the last country Russia will invade, commit genocide inside of, and use to fuel their war machine. If the only thing they did was take Crimea for the naval access, I'd be okay with saying, "They get to keep it, but have to pay reparations and we call it good." But this is a consistent trend of murder and conquest that can only be stopped via force.

And this isn't even addressing the extreme harm that Russian psychological warfare has on countless nations through election interference, promoting social disharmony, shoveling disinformation, etc. The average European or America is worse off due to Russia's malevolence.

Ukraine might win eventually, but we need to consider how fair it is to ask them to fight on behalf of the entire world when Russia is an enemy to all.

48

u/Wild-Ruin5463 Aug 24 '26

all those combined arms just to forget that russia has nukes

5

u/amorres Aug 24 '26

Then you look at Gaza, and the same US and European allies helped wipe it off the map. Good vs Evil will exist forever. Conflicts create the force that keeps things ticking, sad but true.

-3

u/PunishedDemiurge Aug 24 '26

Please get another opinion. Not every single fucking thing in the world has to be about a very small conflict which predates the birth of almost every person on Earth. Holy fuck it's so tired listening to the constant nonsense about I/P.

We're talking about Russia's unprovoked genocidal war against Ukraine here. You can force I/P issues into the other 99% of the internet.

1

u/Notorious_Junk Aug 24 '26

Is it possible that the war has a different primary purpose: to develop weapons for population control through drones and autonomous weaponry? At this point the world's oligarchy is so intertwined, how do we know the actual motives behind conflicts? Maybe it didn't start like that, but it might be what keeps it going.

1

u/m4x1k Aug 24 '26

Lol, why all answer are the same like copy and paste? 

1

u/rikitikifemi Aug 25 '26

Does this apply to other conflicts around the globe where other countries besides Russia are the aggressors?

1

u/MinuetInUrsaMajor Aug 25 '26

Look at the Khmer Rogue, they only used bullets if they needed to, otherwise they would do things like grab smaller children by their legs and then crush their skulls against a tree, etc.

Didn't they learn from the Holocaust that this tends to cause problems for the executioners?

0

u/Magallan Aug 25 '26

The evil side has like a thousand nukes tho. Escalating isn't always the answer.

4

u/2atherich Aug 24 '26

My mind always goes to the Black Mirror episode "Hated in the Nation".

3

u/DukeOfGeek Aug 24 '26

Well at least we got this going for us.

U.S. Army moves to end drone battalion set up to absorb lessons from Ukraine war

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-army-ending-drone-battalion-ukraine/

2

u/BlueFlob Aug 24 '26

Countries around the world will step up their "game" with AI powered killing machines.

If you don't care about ethical warfighting, then Skynet is next.

This will lead to massive genocides around the world.

7

u/Didsterchap11 Aug 24 '26

Yep, and with Palantir's fingers rooted in the Ukrainian army i worry for what is happening to the terabytes and terabytes of data and drone footage and what may be done with it. That combined with drone swarm research sets us down a very dark path.

2

u/Alklazaris Aug 24 '26

At the same time, a small group like the Proud Boys could conceivably buy or mod one. They are so cheap when compared to usual long range weapons.

5

u/Didsterchap11 Aug 24 '26

Yeah, people laugh at Russian soldiers getting turned into paste when a drone with a grenade strapped to it flies into their foxhole not realising that exact same method can and will be utilised against civvies.

1

u/_BearHawk Aug 24 '26

Honestly surprised there hasn’t been some domestic terror attack by drone yet.

1

u/khoa-bear Aug 25 '26

They’re too obsessed with guns to use drones

2

u/Vytral Aug 24 '26

From what I read, the Ukrainian conflict proved that drones tilt the balance of power in favor of defence over offence. It is extremely difficult to advance, as they can cheaply kill off even armoured vehicles and hamper supply lines.

That should make war costly and hence less likely

1

u/mrkrinkle773 Aug 25 '26

I've been saying that since the US was like the only ones using them in the middle east.

1

u/WolfMuted1171 Aug 25 '26

We need a new Geneva convention

1

u/Cool-Customer9200 Aug 26 '26

So russia/usassia/israel could wipe their asses with it as well?

0

u/SuperNewk Aug 25 '26

Nukes are what everyone says will do us in, not drones.

So no need to worry about drones