What? No. The fact that she's ex-military and runs a drone company is precisely why she should be on such a board.
If there is no one on the board with the relevant knowledge and experience to competently represent a given use case, then the board will likely be unable to produce results relevant to such use cases. For example, if I form a board to hash out software version control system best practices but actively exclude experts on distributed VCS such as git and mercurial, then the resulting "best practices" are unlikely to prove useful for anyone actually using a DVCS in reality.
My point here is that excluding her almost certainly won't actually do anything to prevent the development of militarized AI. Rather, it will simply reduce the likelihood that anything the board puts out has influence on such matters.
If there is no one on the board with the relevant knowledge and experience to competently represent a given use case, then the board will likely be unable to produce results relevant to such use cases. For example, if I form a board to hash out software version control system best practices but actively exclude experts on distributed VCS such as git and mercurial, then the resulting "best practices" are unlikely to prove useful for anyone actually using a DVCS in reality.
My point here is that excluding her almost certainly won't actually do anything to prevent the development of militarized AI. Rather, it will simply reduce the likelihood that anything the board puts out has influence on such matters.