I don't know what did we expect after they removed their "Don't be evil" motto.
Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
191–200 of 567 posts
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#192Earlier quoted context omitted.
Tell Putin. He will entertain no such inhibitions.
> no such inhibitions Propping up evil figure/regime/ideology (Bolsheviks/Communists) to justify remorseless evilness (Concentration camps/Nuclear bomb) isn't new nor unique, but particularly predictable.
Sadly, attempts at equating evil figures/regimes/ideologies with those who fight back against them are equally predictable.
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#193I don’t understand why people believe in corporate pledges. They’re just marketing gimmicks. It doesn’t take much effort to scrape pledges off a website.”
Better to ask the question: Why do people WANT to believe in the mouth flapping of corporate PR drones?
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#194Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
> all weapons are evil That wasn't the quote that was removed. Not even close, really.
It's definitely an opinion Google employees had in the last decade. Actually I think a lot of people have it - just yesterday I saw someone on reddit claim Google was evil because it was secretly founded by the US military. And they were American. That's their military!
It’s my military too and I believe the US military does many, many evil things that I want no part of.
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#196Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your point could be made, probably even stronger than it is currently, by omitting the insult at the start.
[flagged]
“More effective” at what? No one is ever going to be convinced by an argument that begins with an insult. So what do you mean by it will be more effective?
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#197I want to be upset over this in an exasperated expression of oddly naive "why can't we all get along?" frame of mind. I want to, because I know how I would like the world to look like, but as a species we, including myself, continually fail to disappoint when it comes nearly guaranteed self-destruction. I want to get upset over it, but I sadly recognize the reality of the why this is not surprising to anyone. We actu…
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." - Karl Marx
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#198I want to be upset over this in an exasperated expression of oddly naive "why can't we all get along?" frame of mind. I want to, because I know how I would like the world to look like, but as a species we, including myself, continually fail to disappoint when it comes nearly guaranteed self-destruction. I want to get upset over it, but I sadly recognize the reality of the why this is not surprising to anyone. We actu…
[flagged]
Technically the US has never dropped nukes, those were atomic bombs.
Second, don’t understand how the atomic bomb argument makes sense. Germany was developing them and would have used them if it got there first.
Are you suggesting the US really is truly the only nation that would ever have used atomic weapons? That if Japan made it first they would have spared China or the US?
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#199Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#200Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
Similarly your point would have communicated better without the unnecessary and adolescent final sentence.
It was for effect.
Maybe you'd prefer if we were all maximally polite drones but that's not how humans are, going back to GPs point, and I don't think it's a state than anyone truly wants either.