The no hit Elden Ring run of toxic political discourse
👋 thanks!
You know, when you put it like that, it kind of puts his thought processes into perspective. I mean, yeah mate, if a candidate personally called me and swore to address my pet issues, I'd probably be won over. But maybe he honestly doesn't grasp that it's completely unreasonable and deeply funny.
"But Adam, aren't you a Patriots fan" Yes, and 2007 still hurts, please appreciate how deep I had to dig within my sports trauma to make this pretty mundane point.
This post has been brought to you by our loyal sponsors: 2 cups of coffee and hours of data cleaning.
Lastly, just wanted to thank both Zach and Ryan for being amazing coauthors. We really went to war for this paper (pun intended). It's a real testament to their tenacity, passion, and overall damn fine social science skills that we were able to see this paper through. 🧵(8/8)
Thus, while human soldiers may be able to avoid some direct blame for errors when using AWS, increased blame placed upon the weapon itself may lead to public demands for accountability over time. 🧵(7/8)
Yet, in the wake of an error resulting in civilian casualties, the public views the use of drone strikes far more critically when the error was made by an AWS rather than a human operator, leading to a larger erosion in support for future military operations. 🧵(6/8)
When decisions result in errors and civilian casualties, we find that the public assigns substantially less blame to human soldiers when using partially or fully autonomous drones. This implies the use of AWS may allow human officials to avoid necessary accountability for their decisions. 🧵(5/8)