
Life as a drone operator - cryoshon
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-drone-pilot-creech-air-force-base-nevada
======
teddyh
“ _At this level of security you didn’t even call them people anymore. And
they were probably doing stuff that only operatives would do. When they went
home to their families in the evening they became people again, and when their
little children looked up to them with their sweet shining eyes and said
‘Daddy, what did you do all day today?’ they just said, ‘I performed my duties
as an operative,’ and left it at that._ ”

— Douglas Adams, _Mostly Harmless_

------
pdkl95
Speaking of drone operators...

If you can take the low-budget effects, I recommend watching the movie Sleep
Dealer[1]. It is probably the best cyberpunk[2] film ever made; unfortunately,
it never got a lot of attention.

The film deals primarily with telepresence, with an emphasis on the remote
operation of drones. Not just military drones, either; drones also enable
"out-of-sight, out-of-mind" workers.

[1] [http://www.sleepdealer.com/](http://www.sleepdealer.com/)

[2] A lot of people confuse cyberpunk with flashy tech and network
shenanigans; Gibson describes cyberpunk as stories about the _interstitial_ \-
the people caught in the cracks of "legitimate" society (consensus reality).

~~~
Hortinstein
thanks for this recommendation, this sounds really interesting. Would you stay
it stands on the level of Primer for quality/budget film making?

~~~
pdkl95
While Sleep Dealer had a bigger budget than Primer's $7000 (I still loved
primer), as you can see in the trailer/etc they were obviously limited in the
CG they could afford. I think they work around that limitation quite well.

A mostly-spoiler-free example might be the "simstim social media" service: by
looks it's pretty cheesy, but in concept it's a _perfect_ caricature of modern
monetized youtube. (from 2008, well before the modern "youtuber" phenomena).

Some people may not like that it's in Spanish (subtitled).

As a long-time fan of everything "cyberpunk", I stand by my claim that Sleep
Dealer is the best cyberpunk film ever made - even if the filmmakers were
dreaming somewhat larger than their budget.

------
RankingMember
The ability to remotely kill and then go home to your family has to make the
impact on operators (the ones with a conscience) so much worse. The buffer
time of a flight back from a real deployment, however short, at least seems
like it'd provide some time for
reflection/rationalization/compartmentalization.

The fact that these operators get shit on by their associates for being out of
harm's way and expressing reservations about their mission can't be helping
either.

~~~
pavement
We found out in the 1970's that flying home from Viet Nam was still too fast
and still too much of an abrupt culture shock for many returning soldiers.

Long slow boat rides and a quiet, personal welcome home seem to have the most
success in easing people back to normal.

That is, of course, as long as the theater/front wasn't actually _IN_ the
country you also happened to live in and call home. Small detail easily
forgotten.

------
dsfyu404ed
I'd just like to point out that they don't write an article about the guys
that say "yeah, it's war but you carry out your orders whatever they are"

~~~
Kristine1975
Ah, the Nuremberg Defense.

~~~
simonh
Aaaand we're Godwined.

Soldiers follow orders. The Nazis followed orders. Therefore all soldiers are
Nazis. Well done. Congratulations.

These people are not following orders 'whatever they are'. They're not
attacking schools because the Taliban's leaders children go there, unlike oh,
I don't know, say the Taliban who massacred 150 children at a school in
Pakistan because soldier's children go there. They have rules of engagement
defining how to determine if an order is legitimate and acceptable, which they
are following, but of course the article never mentions that. Now fair enough,
there are troubling incidents described in the article, but we're only get
individual perspectives, nothing is really corroborated. I'd like to see more
independent oversight of the drone programs. But flinging about Nuremberg
analogies is hardly justified.

~~~
atlantic
The problem is that the US is using drones to kill people inside countries
with whom they are not at war. If you declare war on a country, that does give
you certain rights under the laws of war. But if there is no declaration of
war, you can't go around abducting or killing people in foreign countries just
because they are deemed suspicious.

And declaring war "on terror" won't cut it either; that's basically equivalent
to saying, "we are potentially at war with any country any time, when it suits
us." Nor will saying "they're the bad guys and we are good," which is
kindergarten-level argumentation. Or "we know they're terrorists but we can't
share the evidence, just trust us."

The media discusses the details of drone operations all the times, but omits
to have this much more fundamental discussion about violating the borders of
sovereign countries.

~~~
simonh
> ...you can't go around abducting or killing people in foreign countries...

Actually, yes you can. Suppose that country, Pakistan, is complicit in those
drone strikes, allowed drones to operate from it's territory for a time and
provides intelligence to facilitate them? The (former) Yemeni government also
explicitly permitted drone strikes to be carried out on it's territory.

Governments have always had the right to carry out attacks in order to prevent
imminent threats to their country, and terrorists planning attacks does count.
There is a clear legal framework.

You can reasonably argue that this is wrong and that it doesn't matter how
imminent the threat is or what those people are doing, they cannot be attacked
even if the government of the territory they're in says that you can. That's
an argument you could make, I suppose. But as it stands, as a statement of
fact that's not what international law says.

[http://www.cfr.org/counterterrorism/targeted-
killings/p9627](http://www.cfr.org/counterterrorism/targeted-killings/p9627)

~~~
atlantic
Actually, the article you quoted does not seem to support your claims. There
is a legal framework for targeted killings, but that framework belongs to
American and not international law.

Quoting from your article:

>Philip Alston, the former UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or
arbitrary executions, condemns the U.S. claims of self-defense as overly
expansive, stating that "if other states were to claim the broad-based
authority that the United States does, to kill people anywhere, anytime, the
result would be chaos."

------
jrcii
If you're interested in this topic I highly recommend the 2014 film Good Kill.

------
humbleMouse
Wow, this is heavy. Good article.

------
huuu
There is a Dutch short tv movie about this: [http://www.npo.nl/duivelse-
dilemma-s/30-11-2011/POW_00416089](http://www.npo.nl/duivelse-
dilemma-s/30-11-2011/POW_00416089)

About what it takes to kill at work and be a dad at home.

------
ZanyProgrammer
I could've sworn I've already seen this same topic written about at least once
over the past several years. Why does the Guardian think this is new?

~~~
zelos
The drone operators they interviewed are the same guys who wrote a letter to
Obama recently calling the drone war "a recruitment tool for ISIS".

[http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/obama-drone-
war...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/obama-drone-war-isis-
recruitment-tool-air-force-whistleblowers)

------
13of40
> The number was 1,626.

Wow, that's more than half as many people as were killed in the 9/11 attacks.
We should have this thing wrapped up by Christmas.

------
atemerev
Well, fully autonomous AI-operated drones are inevitable. Remote operated
drones can be jammed. Autonomous drones can't. I think AI programmers won't
have even that much concern about kills.

~~~
simonh
Not for this kind of work. A self-flying drone isn't that much of a problem.
They largely fly themselves already. The human operators are needed to
evaluate the images coming from the drones, identify and prioritize targets
and take the decision exactly where and when to attack. No AI in existence can
automate those tasks.

~~~
zardo
>No AI in existence can automate those tasks.

I think thats unlikely to be true a decade from now.

~~~
simonh
People have been saying that for more than 50 years.

------
dba7dba
If not for these high tech weaponry, A LOT of us who post on this website
would be required to serve in an army. And if unlucky, called upon to try to
kill someone. And if really unlucky, end up KIA or WIA.

Because of these high tech weapons, wealthy western nations are able to
maintain their sovereignty without requiring all fit males to serve in uniform
for 2-3 years.

The alternative to not having these high tech weapons is a man shooting
another man to death.

War is terrible. But that's life.

~~~
jon-wood
The alternative is to stop believing the west has all the answers and should
impose them on the rest of the world, by force if necessary. We've been
involved in countless wars, and few of them have resulted in the world being a
better place to live.

~~~
atemerev
So, female genital mutilation, sex slavery and stoning are all just cultural
differences to be ignored? On some occasions, the West has the answers.

~~~
jon-wood
Not at all. They're abhorent practices that we should be campaigning to end.

You don't change people's minds by turning up and dropping a couple of
Hellfires on them. All that achieves is pissing off their family, and making
them less receptive to your arguments. Would you be receptive to someone
telling you they know better on matters of morality after they blew up your
brother?

~~~
dba7dba
There will be wars. Not just over what West has done to ME. It will be over
money, water, power, etc etc.

And without those high tech weapons, a lot of warm bodies would be required to
pick up a gun and shoot to kill. Close enough to see without the aid of zoomed
image on a screen.

I'm talking beyond just what West has done or not. Or what ME has done.

It's terrible. But again, that's life.

