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

411–420 of 567 posts

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

#411

Post by ninetyninenine »

Barrin92 wrote: post #403
ninetyninenine wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A megacorp is made up of people. So it's people who are fundamentally evil. The main thing here I think is anonymity through numbers and complexity. You and thousands of others just want to see the numbers go up. And that desire is what ultimately influences decisions like this. If google stock dropped because of this then google wouldn't do it. But it is the actions of humans in aggregate that keeps it up. Megacorpo…

>A megacorp is made up of people. So it's people who are fundamentally evil. That is to make a mistake of composition. An entity can have properties that none of its parts have. A cube made out of bricks is round, but none of the bricks are round. You might be evil, your cells aren't evil. It's often the case that institutions are out of alignment with its members. It can even be the case that all participants of an…

But people are aware companies are evil. Why don't they sell the stock? Why do people still buy the stock?

Obviously because they don't give a shit.

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

#412

Post by j2kun »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #107
karaterobot wrote: post #10

Is this more or less ethical than OpenAI getting a DoD contract to deploy models on the battlefield less than a year after saying that would never happen, with the excuse being well we only meant certain kinds of warfare or military purposes, obviously . I guess my question is, isn't there something more honest about an open heel-turn, like Google has made, compared to one where you maintain the fiction that you're s…

I think it's unfair to bring up OpenAI's commitment to its own principles as any sort of bar of success for anyone else. That's a bit like saying "Yes, this does look like they're yielding to foreign tyrants, but is this more or less ethical than Vidkun Quisling's tenure as head of Norway?"

It's... Unfair to compare two software companies? Because of Norway?

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

#413

Post by Sabinus »

croes wrote: post #111
stickfigure wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just how do you propose to remove those tools from Putin's, Xi's, Khomeini's, or Kim Jong-Un's hands?

For removal it’s too late, but maybe slowing down is still possible. There is no advancement that won‘t end up in the wrong hands and most likely it will be a leak from an US company.

So the US needs to develop AI faster than the dictators to keep ahead of them, but not so fast they leak advancements that accelerate the dictators AI?

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

#415

Post by PaulDavisThe1st »

idle_zealot wrote: post #400
PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I prefer the angle that describes this as a shift from value production to value extraction. Value production means coming up with new goods or services, or new/better ways to make existing ones. Value extraction means looking at existing economic exchanges, and figuring out how to get X percent of some of them.

It was always a game of maximizing captured value. In such a game, creating value and capturing some portion of what you're producing is far less effective than value extraction, moving value around such that it's you capturing it, not someone else. A market, then, will by default encourage the latter strategy over the former. However, if the society in charge of a market observes value extraction occurring, it can r…

I would argue that since the dawn of capitalism (whenever you place that), there have been moral structures in place to promote value production and stigmatize value extraction. The precise balance between the two moral verdicts changes back and forth over time. In the USA in the 21st century we seem to have entered a period where the promotion of value production is unusually low and simultaneously the stigmatization of value extraction has dropped close to zero.

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

#416

Post by smgit »

CrimsonCape wrote: post #139
Ekaros wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bait-and-switch model is absolutely amazing as well. Start by offering a service covered with ads. Then add paid tier to get rid of ads. Next add tier with payment and ads. And finally add ads back to every possible tier. Not to forget about keeping them in content all the time.

If you have ever seen the prank interview between Elijah Wood and Dominic Monaghan, "Do you wear wigs? Have you worn wigs? Will you wear wigs?" and Elijah breaks down laughing in total shock at how hilariously bad the interview is... ...I just picture a similar conversation with a CEO going: "Sir, shareholders want to see more improvement this quarter." CEO: "Do we run ads? Have we run ads? Will we run ads this time?…

Some one has to pay for those Ads.

That creates limits to growth of an Ad based ecosystem.

So the thing to pay attention too is not Revenue growth or Profit growth of a Platform but Price of an Ad, Price to increase reach, price to Pay to Boost your post, price of a presidential campaign etc etc. These prices cant grow forever just like with housing prices or we get the equivalent of a Housing Bubble.

Want to destabilize the whole system pump up ad prices.

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

#417

Post by zeroq »

normalaccess wrote: post #187
Ekaros wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bait-and-switch model is absolutely amazing as well. Start by offering a service covered with ads. Then add paid tier to get rid of ads. Next add tier with payment and ads. And finally add ads back to every possible tier. Not to forget about keeping them in content all the time.

Advertising is just the surface layer—the excuse. Digital ads rely on collecting as much personal data as possible, but that data is the real prize. This creates a natural partnership with intelligence agencies: they may not legally collect the data themselves, but they can certainly buy access. This isn’t new. Facebook, for example, received early funding from In-Q-Tel, the CIA’s venture capital arm, and its origins…

Years ago a friend working in security told me that every telco operator in Elbonia has to have a special room in their HQ that's available 24/7 to some goverment officials. Men in black come and go as they please, and while what is actually happening in that room remains a mystery, they can tap straight to the system from within with no restrictions or traceability.

Growing up in soviet bloc I took that story at face value. After all democracy was still a new thing, and people haven't invented privacy concerns yet.

Since then I always thought that some sort of cooperation between companies like Facebook or Google and CIA/DOD was an obvious thing to everyone.

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

#418

Post by LexGray »

CobrastanJorji wrote: post #394
danans wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At least Google employees will sign petitions and do things that follow a moral code. It hardly matters what employees think anymore when the executives are weather-vanes who point in the direction of wealth and power over all else (just like the executives at their competitors). In case you missed it, a few days back Google asked all employees who don't believe in their "mission" to voluntarily resign.

That's not at all what happened. One of Google's division offered a "voluntary exit" in lieu of or in addition to an upcoming layoff, and the email announcing it suggested that it could be a good option for some folks, for example people struggling or for folks who didn't like Google's direction. That is not the same thing as asking everyone who doesn't believe in the mission to please resign.

Now that their direction has done a 180 it is pretty much telling everyone with seniority to just quit.

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

#419

Post by [deleted] »

zeroq wrote: post #417
normalaccess wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Advertising is just the surface layer—the excuse. Digital ads rely on collecting as much personal data as possible, but that data is the real prize. This creates a natural partnership with intelligence agencies: they may not legally collect the data themselves, but they can certainly buy access. This isn’t new. Facebook, for example, received early funding from In-Q-Tel, the CIA’s venture capital arm, and its origins…

Years ago a friend working in security told me that every telco operator in Elbonia has to have a special room in their HQ that's available 24/7 to some goverment officials. Men in black come and go as they please, and while what is actually happening in that room remains a mystery, they can tap straight to the system from within with no restrictions or traceability. Growing up in soviet bloc I took that story at fac…

[deleted]

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

#420

Post by somenameforme »

zeroq wrote: post #417
normalaccess wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Advertising is just the surface layer—the excuse. Digital ads rely on collecting as much personal data as possible, but that data is the real prize. This creates a natural partnership with intelligence agencies: they may not legally collect the data themselves, but they can certainly buy access. This isn’t new. Facebook, for example, received early funding from In-Q-Tel, the CIA’s venture capital arm, and its origins…

Years ago a friend working in security told me that every telco operator in Elbonia has to have a special room in their HQ that's available 24/7 to some goverment officials. Men in black come and go as they please, and while what is actually happening in that room remains a mystery, they can tap straight to the system from within with no restrictions or traceability. Growing up in soviet bloc I took that story at fac…

PRISM [1] is the best evidence of how short-lived most people's memories are. Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, and Facebook were the first 4 members. It makes it pretty funny when companies like Apple (who also joined more than a decade ago) speak about trying to defend customer's privacy against government intrusion. There's so much completely cynical corporate LARPing for PR.

And if one wants to know why big tech from China isn't welcome, be it phones or social media, it's not because fear of them spying on Americans, but because of the infeasibility of integrating Chinese companies into our own domestic surveillance systems.

[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PRISM

Post reply on HN