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

521–530 of 567 posts

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

#521

Post by janalsncm »

danans wrote: post #450
janalsncm wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> 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 What do you think is happening right now?

What is happening is the US is reaping what it sowed 45 years ago with Reagan-era privatization and short-term thinking. It is structurally incapable of executing plans which take more than 2-4 years. So any adversary can outmaneuver the US by simply planning on longer timelines.

Oh look, China has 5 year plans.

Of course the efficiency of a one party state comes at the cost of stability: there are no internal checks on corruption. A two party state is more stable (the US has lasted 240 years) but not infinitely stable.

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

#522

Post by hedora »

ein0p wrote: post #466

Google in 2000: "Do no evil". Google in 2025: "Genocide is profitable". I wonder what Google users outside the US think about this in particular? Our "national security" could be their "national danger" after a single presidential term. Do they want to keep giving Google their money?

I don’t know anyone in the US that supports genocide.

The Trump voters I’ve heard seem to not understand what is currently happening with the administration. Similarly, the pro-Israel folks seem to not realize how bad the ethnic cleansing campaign is.

Anyway, the US is significantly less safe than it was last month.

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

#523

Post by DecoySalamander »

AndyNemmity wrote: post #507
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…

They are fundamentally totalitarian. Orders come from the top, and are taken from below. Seems fundamentally evil.

By this definition, mom telling you to clean your room is also a form of totalitarianism, and yet you somehow find the strength to manage.

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

#524

Post by ajdude »

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…

> while megacorps aren't fundamentally "evil" (for some definitions of evil)

A couple years ago, my state banned single use plastic bags. The very moment they did, all of my local Walmarts switched to heavier plastic bags that technically weren't single use. They still gave them away for free just as they did with the first ones. (These we're good quality bags and I was frustrated that Walmart didn't just give them away by default). Eventually my state banned those too, and like clockwork, Walmart was giving away paper bag bags -- decent quality ones, too. Though I still really liked the thicker plastic ones since I could use them for other things.

This made me realize that no corporation would do anything slightly better for the environment unless forced. I think this is the case for anything a corporation would do, including evil things. I think they just follow the money, no ethics, and it's up to the government to provide those ethics.

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

#525

Post by switchbak »

astrange wrote: post #306
switchbak wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And these same organizations fuel conflicts that actively make the USA less safe. These organizations can both do great things (hostage rescues) and terrible things (initiating coups), and it’s upon the citizenry to ensure that these forces are put to use only where justified. That is to say almost never.

We've stopped South American coups more recently than we've initiated them. (in the last few years, in Brazil and Bolivia)

Truly, the last few minutes of American history is not material to the argument I’m making here.

And I don’t doubt there’s still a lot of subterfuge happening as we speak, most of which we’ll never hear about until something goes very wrong.

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

#526

Post by robocat »

roca wrote: post #488
robocat wrote: post #448

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Keeping $60K out of every $100K extra salary I make is plenty of motivation to work harder That's good that it motivates you. It doesn't motivate me any more. I'm not interested in "investing" more time for the reasons I have said. > the taxes paid aren't burned, they mostly go to things I care about. I'm pleased for you. I'd like to put more money towards things I care about. > The income tax rate isn't all that r…

> It doesn't motivate me any more. I find it hard to understand how $60K means no motivation but $100K would be highly motivating. > I'd like to put more money towards things I care about. You said later that you care about the public health system and helping the elderly. That's where a large percentage of our taxes go. > Huh? Dividends are income. Or are you talking about the non-monetary rewards of owning a busine…

Perhaps "loss aversion" is important to me: I'm not a spherically rational Homo economicus.

Our society mostly works because of our non-monetary rewards, not because of monetary incentives. My teaching and nursing friends work for their own satisfaction, and more money is not a high priority to them.

I am not particularly motivated by money. I suspect you are a businessperson that believes money is strongly motivating? I chased financial success for 15 years when I started from $0: however I now hope I have enough and I hope it won't be unfairly taken from me. Yes, money was a big incentive then (and my personal costs have been very high), but now I have other goals.

I suspect I psychologically find high marginal taxation demotivating (48% if we include GST). Maybe because I have too many acquaintances and family sucking at the government tit. I see where government money goes because I have a wide variety of acquaintances including retirees, elderly, unhealthy, and unemployed. Yeah, I know they are not living the high life (well, maybe my drug-abusing anti-social acquaintances think they are).

> No, I'm talking about selling all or part of the business

Which requires an intense amount of work, and sometimes a significant loss, and usually requires selling 100%... Why should I sell at 4x earnings when I can hold on to the business - even if I don't want it? Taxation has too much influence on my investments because rebalancing across other investments has too high a cost/risk.

I guess I'm an idealist. I believe in startups, and I believe they help all New Zealanders. But the incentives of our taxation system mean that founding a startup is foolish: I don't recommend to anyone that they should be a founder (even though I have won the gamble). The unrecoverable costs of anything but spectacular success are too high. The non-monetary rewards are poor in my experience. The expected median return for a startup founder is about $0. Our social systems and taxation systems need to encourage business inception and growth so that all of NZ can be better off.

Thank you for your questions. It is always good to be asked why!

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

#527

Post by 4gotunameagain »

reissbaker wrote: post #395
QjdgatkH wrote: post #364

A country that now threatens the annexation of Greenland and advocates for a complete resettlement of all Palestinians to Jordan and Egypt certainly needs weapons for crowd control. These weapons could also come in handy domestically if people find out that both parties screw them all the time. I wonder why people claim that China is a threat out side of economics. Has China tried to invade the US? Has Russia tried t…

"Russia hasn't tried to invade the EU" is quite weasel-word-y. They certainly have invaded countries in Europe , specifically Ukraine; the only reason they didn't invade countries in the European Union itself is that would trigger a war that they would face massive casualties from and inevitably lose, in part due to NATO alliances. Military power is what has kept the EU safe, and countries without strong enough milit…

While framing Ukraine as a European country is not weasel-word-y ?

Would you say that the chances / motives / possibilities to invade Ukraine is remotely comparable with any other European country ?

And no, Turkey for example is not a European country.

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

#528

Post by mikrotikker »

int_19h wrote: post #372
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.

To quote the email from Hulu that recently dropped into my inbox: > We are clarifying that, as we continue to increase the breadth and depth of the content we make available to you, circumstances may require that certain titles and types of content include ads, even in our 'no ads' or 'ad free' subscription tiers. So at this point they aren't even bothering to rename the tier from "ad free" even as they put ads in it…

Arrr matey climb aboard yer don't need Hulu where we're going

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

#529

Post by mikrotikker »

bamboozled wrote: post #497
doublerabbit wrote: post #490

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I better get started on building those Metal Gear Rays.

I guess it won't be long until there are drones which can take out drones autonomously. Somewhat neutralizing the threat...providing you have enough capable drones yourself :)

Check out Andurils Anvil

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

#530

Post by iteratethis »

NemoNobody wrote: post #141
iteratethis wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason war may be coming is because the West is falling apart. The US is isolating itself and bullying its allies. Alternative powers wanting to do something expansive never had a better moment in time to do so. There was no war forthcoming between an integrated West and any other power. War is coming because there no longer is a West.

Right. So... when the Russian tanks start rolling on the way to Berlin and Chinese troops are marching along that nice new (old) road they finished fixing up - otw to Europe, so if that happens, which looks possible - you think there will be no West?? If the world is to be divided Europe is the lowest hanging and sweetest fruit. I think there will still be West even if there is a King in the US demanding fealty to pa…

I mean there will be no West as we currently know it. The US is now a hostile state to former allies that collectively make up what we call the West. Thus the West disintegrates.

Each disintegrated part will of course defend itself in case of war, but other scenarios are possible. For example, the EU could actually move closer towards China for trade.

When the US threatens allies with economic disruption or even an invasion, don't be surprised if those countries make alternative plans and team up with alternative powers.

Post reply on HN