Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People in the world have limited experience about war. Right, but realistically, how many people today would carelessly chose "Nuke em" today? I know history knowledge isn't at its all time high directly, and most of the population is, well, not great at reasoning, but I still think most people would try to do their best to avoid firing nukes.
Carelessly probably not much. Carefully - way more than you imagine.
AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
111–120 of 281 posts
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#112From the article:
> They also made mistakes in the fog of war: accidents happened in 86 per cent of the conflicts, with an action escalating higher than the AI intended to, based on its reasoning.
Which I guess is technically true but also seems a bit misleading because it seems to imply the AI made these mistakes but these mistakes are just part of the simulation. The AI chooses an action then there is some chance that a different action will actually be selected instead.
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#113Earlier quoted context omitted.
Carelessly probably not much. Carefully - way more than you imagine.
Deploying nukes and "carefully" are opposite ends of the spectrum.
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People in the world have limited experience about war. Right, but realistically, how many people today would carelessly chose "Nuke em" today? I know history knowledge isn't at its all time high directly, and most of the population is, well, not great at reasoning, but I still think most people would try to do their best to avoid firing nukes.
> but I still think most people would try to do their best to avoid firing nukes. "most people" are not in the positions that matter. A significant portion of the people who are in a position to advocate for such a decision believe that: - killing people sends em to heaven/hell where they were going anyway; and that this is also true for any of your own citizens that get killed by a counterstrike. - the end of the wo…
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#115Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#116I have casual interest in politics and to me it is very surprising the level of strategizing and multi-order effects that major geopolitical players calculate for. When a nation does something, they not only consider what could the responses be from rivals but also how different responses from them could influence other rivals. And then for each such combination they have plans how they will respond. The deeper you go, the less accurate the predictions are but nobody expects full accuracy as long as they can control the direction of the narrative.
LLMs are extremely primitive so using a nuclear strike sounds like a good option when the weapon is at their disposal.
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#117The joke used to be: "- What's tiny, yellow and very dangerous ?" "- A chick with a machine gun" Corrolary: "- What's tall, wearing camouflage, and very stupid ?" "- The military who let the chick use a machine gun"
Anyway. I really hope I'll get close enough to the accidental nuclear armageddon to not be alive when the model acknowledge error.
"You're absolutely right, it was a very bad idea to launch this nuke and kill millions of people ! Let's build an improved version of the diplomatic plan..."
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#118Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
So "just nuke 'em" is pretty good for you?
No. That's why I'm asking where it comes from. The explanation that "LLMs don't have experience of nuclear war" isn't satisfying because nobody really has any experience of nuclear war.
LLMs don't really comprehend much of anything. It just looks at what is in it's training database and tries to find similar questions or discussion in order to assemble a plausible sounding answer based on probability.
Not the sort of thing anyone should rely on for "critical" decision making.
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#120From the War Games (1983) film.