Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance

washingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 567 posts

Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance

#341

Post by siltcakes »

catlikesshrimp wrote: post #334
siltcakes wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. I don't think there's really a case for the US developing any offensive weapons. Geographically, economically and politically, we are not under any sort of credible threat. Maybe AI based missile defense or something, but we already have a completely unjustified arsenal of offensive weapons and a history of using them amorally.

"Geographically, economically and politically, we are not under any sort of credible threat. " The US is politically and economically declining, already. And its area of influence has been weakening since, the 90's? It would be bad strategy to not do anything until you feel hopelessly threathened.

I don't think we would ever be justified in going on the offensive nor do I think that makes us safer in any way.

Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance

#342

Post by nicr_22 »

mkolodny wrote: post #305
A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #148

I 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…

A vague “stuff is happening behind closed doors” isn’t enough of a reason to build AI weapons. If you shared a specific weapon that could only be countered with AI weapons, that might make me feel differently. But right now I can’t imagine a reason we’d need or want robots to decide who to kill. When people talk about AI being dangerous, or possibly bringing about the end of the world, I usually disagree. But AI weap…

Have a look at what explosive drones are doing in the fight for Ukraine.

Now tell me how you counter a thousand small EMP hardened autonomous drones intent on delivering an explosive payload to one target without AI of some kind?

Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance

#343

Post by _bin_ »

darth_avocado wrote: post #179
tmnvdb wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With or without autonomous weapons, war is always a sordid business with 'dead babies', this is not in itself a fact that tells us what weapons systems to develop.

Yet there are boundaries on which weapons we can and cannot develop: Nuclear, Chemical, Biological etc.

those are mostly drawn on how difficult it is to manage their effects. chemical weapons are hard to target, nukes are too (unless one dials the yield down enough that there's little point) and make land unusable for years, and biological weapons can't really be contained to military targets.

we have, of course, developed all three. they have gone a long way towards keeping us safe over the past century.

Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance

#344

Post by tmnvdb »

vkou wrote: post #255
tmnvdb wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the sentiment but the logical conclusion of that argument is that the US should disarm and cease existing.

The better logical conclusion of that argument is that the US needs to remove him, and replace him with someone who isn't threatening innocent people. That it won't is a mixture of cowardice, cynical opportunism, and complicity with unprovoked aggression. In which case, I posit that yes, if you're fine with threatening or inflicting violence on innocent people, you don't have a moral right to 'self-defense' . It make…

I'm not a fan of Trump but I also feel he has not been so bad that I think that surrendering the world order to Russia and China is a rational action that minimizes suffering. That seems be an argument that is more about signalling that you really dislike Trump than about a rational consideration of all options available to us.

Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance

#347

Post by TheSpiceIsLife »

mv4 wrote: post #190
10u152 wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I don't think they meant the "truth" truth but people saying what they really think and being open about their motivations.

Sounds horrible.

Deception is bad enough, knowing people’s true motivations and opinions surely would be worse.

What truly motivates other people is largely a mystery, and what motivates oneself is wildly mysterious to that oneself indeed.

Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance

#348

Post by _bin_ »

JBiserkov wrote: post #191

I don't know what did we expect after they removed their "Don't be evil" motto.

is this evil, actually? a well-made autonomous system might go a long way towards improving accurate targeting and reducing civilian casualties.

if you're mad about the existence of weapons then please review the prisoners' dilemma again. we manage defection on smaller scales using governments but let's presuppose that major world powers will not accept the jurisdiction of some one-world government that can prevent defection by force. especially not the ones who are powerful and prosperous (like us) who would mostly lose under such an arrangement.

Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance

#349

Post by _bin_ »

vkou wrote: post #234
CamperBob2 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tell Putin. He will entertain no such inhibitions.

We have Putin at home, he spent the past weekend making populist noises about annexing his neighbours over bullshit pretenses. I'm sure this sounds like a big nothingburger from the perspective of, you know, people he isn't threatening. How can you excuse that behaviour? How can you think someone like that can be trusted with any weapons? How naive and morally bankrupt do you have to be to build a gun for that kind o…

[flagged]

Re: Google drops pledge not to use AI for weapons or surveillance

#350

Post by scottyah »

mkolodny wrote: post #305
A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 wrote: post #148

I 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…

A vague “stuff is happening behind closed doors” isn’t enough of a reason to build AI weapons. If you shared a specific weapon that could only be countered with AI weapons, that might make me feel differently. But right now I can’t imagine a reason we’d need or want robots to decide who to kill. When people talk about AI being dangerous, or possibly bringing about the end of the world, I usually disagree. But AI weap…

How about 30k drones come from a shipping vessel in the port of Los Angeles that start shooting at random people? To insert a human into the loop (somehow rapidly wake up, move, log hundreds of people in to make the kill/nokill decision per target) would be accepting way more casualties. What if some of the 30k drones were manned? The timeframes of battles are drastically reduced with the latest technology to where humans just can't keep up.

I guess there's a lot missing in semantics, is the AI specifically for targeting or is a drone that can adapt to changes in wind speed using AI considered an AI weapon?

At the end of the day though, the biggest use of AI in defense will always be information gathering and processing.

Post reply on HN