Earlier quoted context omitted.
WMDs anyone?
Weapons of Math Destruction?
I read this in Mike Tyson's voice.
OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon
411–420 of 509 posts
Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon
#412On reading the headline, everyone’s mind immediately goes to GPT-powered killbots, when in reality this is more likely to RAG its way through mountains of procurement paperwork and other mundane procedural documents.
Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon
#413Earlier quoted context omitted.
Or they received a classified briefing showing how far ahead China or other adversaries are in terms of AI for military use and felt obligated to not let the US fall further behind.
Last I heard the Chinese had found a way of fueling their rockets with tap water. We're screwed regardless of their AI prowess.
I just spit sparkling water through my nose and it’s like 3am and IM in bed.
Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon
#414Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hard to say why it was downvoted but I can say it’s a highly unlikely scenario. You typically need a security clearance to view classified info. Further, many employees at OpenAI may not even be US citizens, and even if they are, many others aren’t super enthusiastic about giving the Pentagon new toys to use.
OpenAI had/has 57 Chinese talent [1], they're probably getting the boot if OpenAI picks up Pentagon contracts. https://macropolo2.wpenginepowered.com/wp-content/uploads/20...
[flagged]
Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon
#415Earlier quoted context omitted.
> There is no question that the US has acted like a bully in Southern America, but you ignore that other countries have acted the same way in other parts of the world[1], and with far more disastrous results[2]. No. The argument is not that having some other country as hegemon would be better than the US. The argument is that any single country being overly powerful is a negative, and a more multipolar would would be…
> The argument is that any single country being overly powerful is a negative, and a more multipolar would would be healthier. I don't find that convincing, given that the main claimants to this "multipolar world" are totalitarian dictatorships. > Russia has spent the past year failing to conquer a country of 40 million, without any involvement from those missile silos. If they tried to invade Poland or Finland they…
> I don't find that convincing, given that the main claimants to this "multipolar world" are totalitarian dictatorships.
If the USA is dictating issues outside its borders, and the affected people have no vote in US politics, then to them, this isn't conceptually different from being ruled by a dictatorship at all.
Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon
#416On reading the headline, everyone’s mind immediately goes to GPT-powered killbots, when in reality this is more likely to RAG its way through mountains of procurement paperwork and other mundane procedural documents.
Personally I was thinking about mass surveillance. It skips the need for actual people to listen and flag bad content, so allows the military to do it on a much grander scale.
I am pretty sure the military already has killbots…
Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon
#417Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is Kuwait the US? No. Then by definition it cannot be defense to take military action over there.
Defense of another isn't defense now? In what universe?
In a sane universe.
You could rephrase ALL invasions as "defense of another". For example, Putin's excuse to invade Ukraine was 'to "protect the people" of the Russian-controlled breakaway republics.'
Otherwise you're just arguing that countries can point at some random object and say "that's under my watch" and bring armies to fight for that thing. In a sane universe that's called an invasion. Whether the invasion is morally justified or not is another matter.
Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon
#418Earlier quoted context omitted.
Imagine once they hallucinate and attack friendlies. Although if Machine Vision counts as AI then it's already widespread.
I imagine you point it at a location where only enemies are.
All fun and games until a civilian shows up. Not that we haven't targeted them before but using a system known for its issues is worse. It means we are targeting them by design.
Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon
#419Earlier quoted context omitted.
sounds like nuclear proliferation?
Sure. I believe the atomic bombs have primarily led to the long peace we enjoy today, relative to the kind of large scale total international wars that preceded their invention. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Peace
> peace we enjoy today
Perhaps you didn't read the news in the past two years..
Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon
#420Ok so a few weeks ago, virtually every OpenAi employee signed a letter saying “reinstate Altman or I quit”. Is any OpenAi employee wanting to sign a “don’t use OpenAi for war or I quit”? Or was everyone in on betraying all OpenAi’s founding principles from the start?
look at Google for reference on this matter