And you want to make the program "more efficient."
This is the gulf which I cannot seem to bridge.
Extra-judicial killings of "terrorists" in "bad places" using flying killer robots is just batshit insane to me. I cannot for the life of me understand how that conversation would go with, e.g. Thomas Jefferson or Alexander Hamilton. Or really anyone who believes in human rights.
I'm not saying I support it from a moral standpoint but I don't think it's fair to call them extra-judicial except in a few cases.
No, it is the rule.
Drone strikes are incredibly high in collateral damage. The estimate is 28 unidentified people for each 1 target;
https://reprieve.org.uk/press/2014_11_25_us_drone_strikes_ki...
As far as I know, CIA assassinations of foreign citizens aren't illegal as long as they take place outside of the US.
There was at least one instance of a drone strike killing one or two American citizens which is definitely extra-judicial. Most drone strikes do not kill American citizens so referring to drone strikes in general as extra-judicial doesn't seem accurate to me.
I would like to clarify that I don't necessarily think that the US's use of drone strikes is morally correct. I just think it's not correct to refer to it as extra-judicial.
Then “AI” should be the least of your worries. Not everything is a software problem.
Their only intention here is to scale up their drone programs.
Which is exactly what they have been doing since day one, but to keep growing they need some help to make these robots a bit more autonomous.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/18/life-as-a-dron...
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/03/drone-pilots-ar...
The same amount of shaped-explosive that can crack a skull, can neutralize one of these drones. As such, the braindead countermeasure is to retarget these same drones at the stolen drones. At worst, the IFF radios might add a negligible amount of mass ... but that won't matter for long, because once the enemy knows you're deploying counterdrones, they'll need their own IFF radios in order to try to avoid your counterdrones. (Or the enemy could add armor to their drones, but that will make them massive/unmaneuverable enough that you can increase your counterdrones' explosive payload to penetrate their armor, while still being able to intercept them.)
If you're looking for historical analogy, try military aviation in general. During the first World War, bomber planes would have been game-changing ... if not that there were fighters, too. A slaughterbot is a bomber; a slaughterbot that seeks the enemy's slaughterbots is a fighter.