An important part of this discussion is how Google's AI is used as part of the genocide in Gaza. Read here for more details about the role of AI there: https://www.972mag.com/lavender-ai-israeli-army-gaza/
Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
291–300 of 567 posts
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#292Earlier quoted context omitted.
Palantir doesn't make autonomous weapons, they sell SQL queries and have an evil-sounding name because it recruits juniors who think the name is cool. Might be thinking of Anduril.
Palantir literally developed Lavender that has been used for autonomous targeting in the bombardments of the Gaza stripe. Look it up.
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#293Why on earth would a for profit company refuse a potential line of profit? They already dumped "do no evil" many years ago and they are now all in on fuck the poor and fuck the rest: I'm making profits and all is fine. Google makes money and they don't appear to care how - its all about the money.
The problem with this is that if companies are just profit maximizers then one of the things it should do is to realign the government. After all, a friendlier government can help to decrease regulation and increase incentives.
Plus, in a healthy economy if everyone is bribing the government shouldn’t it all cancel out? Well it turns out the poor don’t bribe the government very often, so they are easily ignored.
And suddenly, when the government is co-opted into believing anything that gets in the way of “business” is bad, they figure out that money that could be spent on social services could also be spent on corporate tax incentives! Eventually the entire country becomes one big profit maximizer.
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#294I 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…
You can and should be upset. No reason to become complacent, that's a path to accelerated destruction.
Amen.
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#295I 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 path we're on was inevitable the second man discovered fire.
No matter which way you look at it, we live on a planet where resources are scarce. Which means there will be competition. Which means there will be innovation in weaponry.
That said, we've had nukes for decades, and have collectively decided to not use them for decades. So there is some room for optimism.
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#296The Iraq wars led to trillions of dollars spent on defense. Massive defense profits led to massive lobbying, more spending.
Eventually tech and even startups follow the money. Palantir is considered cool. YC started accepting defense startups. Marc Andreessen is on X nonstop promoting conservative views of all kinds. PG becomes anti-wokism warrior.
This is how it happens. Step by step.
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#297I 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…
What we should have ideally done as humans is find a way to not allow AI combat.
Now that's off the table, I think America should have AI weapons because everyone else will be developing them as quickly as possible.
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#298Good, this idea that all weapons are evil is an insane luxury belief.
It's not a luxury belief for a multinational tech company that intends to remain in business in countries that are not allied to the US. Being seen as independent of the military has a dollar value, but that may be smaller than value of defense contracts Google hopes to get.
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is it woke nonsense to not want to create a weapon that probabilistically determines if a civilian looks close enough like a bad guy to missle strike them?
This sentiment ignores the reality on the ground in favor of performative ideological purity - civilians are already getting blown up all the time by systems that do not even attempt to make any distinction between civilians and soldiers: artillery shells, mortars, landmines, rockets, etc.
The reality on the ground is that one of the very first uses of AI weapons was to target civilians in Gaza:
> Moreover, the Israeli army systematically attacked the targeted individuals while they were in their homes — usually at night while their whole families were present — rather than during the course of military activity.
Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance
#300It is interesting how these companies shift with the political winds Just like Meta announced some changes around the time of inauguration, I'm sure Google management has noticed the AI announcements, and they don't want to be perceived in a certain way by the current administration I think the truth is more in the middle (there is tons of disagreement within the company), but they naturally care about how they are p…
I think in theory it's a good thing that companies shift with the political winds.
Companies technically have disproportionate power.
It's better that they shift according to the will of the people.
The alternative, that companies act according to their own will, could be much worse.