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

351–360 of 567 posts

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

#351

Post by portaouflop »

dgfitz wrote: post #150
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…

Could you imagine how the entire world would look if they took truth serum for an entire year, how different the world might be? Lies run the planet, and it stinks.

Put LSD in the drinking water

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

#352

Post by _bin_ »

energy123 wrote: post #240

Many will hate to hear this but the only solution is one world government or at least a unipolar order that reduces the survival need to participate in arms races. Arms race dynamics between nations will be the end of our species.

correct. this is why i support maintaining the American-run world order by all means we have at our disposal. it's both the best outcome for our citizens (therefore our government should pursue it) and the best outcome for the world at large. we will never accept (nor should we) the sort of one-world power that would be necessary to block defection so us running the thing is the least-bad option.

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

#354

Post by portaouflop »

a_shovel wrote: post #2

I initially thought that this was an announcement for a new pledge and thought, "they're going to forget about this the moment it's convenient." Then I read the article and realized, "Oh, it's already convenient." Google is a megacorp, and while megacorps aren't fundamentally "evil" (for some definitions of evil), they are fundamentally unconcerned with goodness or morality, and any appearance that they are is purely…

Megacorps are a form of slow AI in itself — totally alien to human minds and essentially uncontrollable

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

#355

Post by dataflow »

octopoc wrote: post #188
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…

In WWII neither side used poison gas. It doesn’t have to be this way.

You should read this, it might change your mind: https://acoup.blog/2020/03/20/collections-why-dont-we-use-ch...

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

#356

Post by vkou »

tmnvdb wrote: post #344
vkou wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's not a shallow, dismissable, just-your-opinion-maaan 'dislike' to observe that he is being an aggressor. Just like it's not a 'dislike' to observe that Putin is being one.

There are more options than arming an aggressor and capitulating to foreign powers. It's a false dichotomy to suggest it.

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

#357

Post by _bin_ »

gdilla wrote: post #6

What is a $1M TC when you'll get jacked on your way to the tech bus for turning America into mad max? You're not rich enough to have your own billionaire bunker.

- you assume this will turn America into a dystopia. more likely it contributes to restoring and maintaining uncontested American overmatch, especially in the long term, where effectively no other nation can challenge us.

- 1mmTC is enough to do this depending on how one allocates spending. land in many parts of the country is not that expensive.

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

#358

Post by scottyah »

siltcakes wrote: post #336
scottyah wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without going too far into it, if we laid down all offensive weapons the cartels in Mexico would be inside US borders and killing people within a day.

You think the cartels aren't attacking us because we have missiles that can hit Mexico? I don't agree. Somewhat tangentially, the cartels only exist because the US made recreational drugs illegal.

Not sure where the missiles came from, you said all offensive weapons so in my mind I was picturing basic firearms. Drug trade might be their most profitable business but I think you're missing a whole lot of cultural context by saying the US's policy on drugs is their sole reason for existing. Plenty of cartels deal in sex trafficking, kidnapping, extortion, and even mining and logging today.

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

#359

Post by _bin_ »

asdfman123 wrote: post #313
energy123 wrote: post #240

Many will hate to hear this but the only solution is one world government or at least a unipolar order that reduces the survival need to participate in arms races. Arms race dynamics between nations will be the end of our species.

I think having nations competing against each other is a good thing. Governments become corrupted and collapse: it would be a shame if the only world government fell into the hands of a dictator. That being said the only way I could imagine we'd get a single world order is one country dominating everyone else, just like superpowers and regional powers dominate their respective parts of the globe. Never ever ever are…

America is the only nation that currently has consolidated global power behind an even vaguely free nation.

and yes, America has done that for the "pax Americana" period. unfortunately we were short-sighted and allowed people too much free reign to be stupid and anti-American.

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

#360

Post by myth_drannon »

It's interesting how AI for weapons topic immediately brought palinazis with their own agenda ( some bots I guess?). As if Israel is some sort of military AI superpower(it's not, read accounts of Oct 7th events) and the rest of armies are still using muskets and smoke signals.
Post reply on HN