I said it takes the humanity out if it. I am not, nor have I ever been against, having a border patrol. You’re putting words in my internet mouth.
It’s how you approach the idea of border patrol. I don’t know the ratios but border enforcement probably splits their time between smugglers of things and smugglers of people (or just Individuals crossing).
This fully AI based border-patrol system could work well if you see the border patrol problem as a "bringing shit in that we never want, under any circumstance" scenario, so for drugs this could work well. (although it'll just be yet another cat and mouse game, with the AI taking even longer to learn)
But the other side of the coin is the people side. It's more complicated. With people, it isn't just "we never want, under any circumstances" – there are many questions to be asked. We want to apprehend the actual smugglers for trafficking people, even if we want to deport the actual migrants, we want to properly file them, make sure they aren't malnourished, and send them back safely. Is an AI going to do all that? No. That's the problem with this solution.
I'm sorry that this doesn't fit into a binary view of "he must hate this totally AI border control, so he must be for open borders!"
Binary view? Hate? what are you speaking about? I am just pointing to you the fact that you are mixing current politics with a principle of law and order which derived from any civilization. The conclusions you extract from it are all yours.
You should listen Palmer's interview in the podcast someone suggested in this entry. There is no humanity in the security arc or control of any airport, or in the form of any bureau and, even if there is a lot of margin for improvement, and there are methods effective than others, I do not believe that by denying these "control elements" their role and purpose will just fade away as if the civilization never needed them in the first place.
As soon as you recognize we need to have these controls in place, why not make them more effective? The humanity towards infractors of a bureaucratic process is regulated in a separate term, and it should not be left to a physical exam to the ones who can skip a control. And regarding humanity, these methods do not imply the judgement of a human person on individuals, it just will multiply the effectiveness.
As said I did not want to get into the current political discussions on the topic, just to remark that these things exist because they are necessary and negating them is negating the reality of the world.
It’s how you approach the idea of border patrol. I don’t know the ratios but border enforcement probably splits their time between smugglers of things and smugglers of people (or just Individuals crossing).
This fully AI based border-patrol system could work well if you see the border patrol problem as a "bringing shit in that we never want, under any circumstance" scenario, so for drugs this could work well. (although it'll just be yet another cat and mouse game, with the AI taking even longer to learn)
But the other side of the coin is the people side. It's more complicated. With people, it isn't just "we never want, under any circumstances" – there are many questions to be asked. We want to apprehend the actual smugglers for trafficking people, even if we want to deport the actual migrants, we want to properly file them, make sure they aren't malnourished, and send them back safely. Is an AI going to do all that? No. That's the problem with this solution.
I'm sorry that this doesn't fit into a binary view of "he must hate this totally AI border control, so he must be for open borders!"