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

Google workers seek 'red lines' on military A.I., echoing Anthropic

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 155 posts

Re: Google workers seek 'red lines' on military A.I., echoing Anthropic

#131

Post by nradov »

jmyeet wrote: post #95
nradov wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to be laboring under the naive belief that mainland China is a rational actor which will refrain from attacking Taiwan over fear of heavy losses and possible defeat. You might have been correct at some point, but that situation no longer obtains. Xi Jinping has successfully purged all potential rivals and personally taken over centralized control of all important decisions. We have no visibility into his thi…

So I follow a number of China scholars and experts and I've yet to see any consensus about what these military purges actually mean. It could be about corruption. You see this in the Russian military where paid-for tanks didn't exist because the generals had pocketed the money. It could be to have an expansionist policy. It could well be to not have an expansionist policy. The point is that nobody really knows yet. B…

Interesting but irrelevant. Hope is not a strategy. In intelligence analysis you have to look at capabilities and intents. We have no clear understanding of Xi's true intents, so for national security purposes we have to assume they're negative.

Re: Google workers seek 'red lines' on military A.I., echoing Anthropic

#132

Post by nradov »

wewtyflakes wrote: post #81
nradov wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US military has deployed fully autonomous weapons systems since 1979. If you're worried about that then you're a little late.

It seems weird to equivocate the capabilities of "ai" in 1979 to what we have now; clearly it is on a different level.

Really? Autonomous weapons systems hold a lot of potential but as of today they haven't been very useful in real operations.

Re: Google workers seek 'red lines' on military A.I., echoing Anthropic

#133

Post by nradov »

tokioyoyo wrote: post #120
nradov wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US military has deployed fully autonomous weapons systems since 1979. If you're worried about that then you're a little late.

Yes, but we both know this is not the same kind of “autonomous weapons”.

No, I don't know that at all. The differences so far are only incremental. There is the potential for another revolution in military affairs due to autonomous systems but so far it hasn't actually arrived.

Re: Google workers seek 'red lines' on military A.I., echoing Anthropic

#134

Post by boilerupnc »

remarkEon wrote: post #113
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any reason to think that autonomous weapons are a critical strategic capability? It's hard to see what an unpiloted drone can do that a remotely piloted drone can't, other than perhaps human rights violations.

The simple version: Weapons systems are quickly advancing to the point where many of them can navigate and operate independent of human control. The obvious question here is at which point do we give these platforms release authority for lethal weapons. It becomes impractical to require (or even imagine, really) there to be a human "pilot" operating every single drone when you have hundreds or thousands of them opera…

Related: Reminds me of the slaughterbot video [0] and the Hated in the Nation Dark Mirror Episode [1][2]

[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CO6M2HsoIA

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hated_in_the_Nation

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TN_kI7ELLJE

Re: Google workers seek 'red lines' on military A.I., echoing Anthropic

#136

Post by Hikikomori »

jmyeet wrote: post #68
Xeronate wrote: post #26

I understand the vision, but how does this work on a global scale. e.g. American employees refuse to build this, but China's don't. Edit: I originally ended with "What would have happened if Germany had a nuclear bomb and America didn't?", but I think it distracted from the point I was trying to make so moving this to an edit. I'm not trying to ask "is the US the bad guy". I'm trying to ask how to balance personal an…

I'm going to give a shout out here to an episode of the excellent podcast Hardcore History , specifically Episode 59: The Destroyer of Worlds [1]. The development of the atomic bomb created a debate in American policy circles about how the US should react. Within a few years, the same debate occurred over developing thermonuclear weapons. The same question kept coming up: what if the enemy has these weapons and we do…

Actually great post. Can also recommend the behind the bastards episodes about this, maybe not as accurate as Carlin but more humourous.

https://podcasts.apple.com/se/podcast/part-one-the-men-who-m...

Re: Google workers seek 'red lines' on military A.I., echoing Anthropic

#137

Post by [deleted] »

lordofgibbons wrote: post #41
dotancohen wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is there any controversy about defending one's nation being "good" or "bad"? I can not believe what I am reading here, and how the single comment supporting defending one's country is so heavily downvoted. Qatar has poisoned Western online communities such that all defence of the United States is considered taboo? I don't even live in the US and I am frightened by what I see here.

The controversy isn't about defending one's country, it's about you and the parent comment author assuming what this is all about without reading the article. The core of the issue about autonomous use of AI in mass surveillance of Americans and autonomous use of AI in automated weapons that make kill decisions. Anthropic is perfectly fine with working with the War Department and "defending one's nation". But they ar…

[deleted]

Re: Google workers seek 'red lines' on military A.I., echoing Anthropic

#138

Post by verdverm »

bigyabai wrote: post #5
verdverm wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

every change starts with a few people, and then it grows

Google is grandfathered into a few preexisting defense contracts. Any red lines you draw may have already been crossed.

Contracts expire and can be renegotiated, or even reneged on if you are willing to accept the consequences (which you may see as preferable to enabling wanton murder)

Re: Google workers seek 'red lines' on military A.I., echoing Anthropic

#139

Post by verdverm »

cheonn638 wrote: post #12
verdverm wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

every change starts with a few people, and then it grows

> every change starts with a few people, and then it grows your opinion is defense contracts are bad my opinion is defense contracts are good who is correct? probably me since 99.9% of Googlers won’t leave over this

Thanks for informing me of my opinion on defense contracts /s

Their goal is not to leave, it is to start a conversation that hopefully ends up changing company policy.

Re: Google workers seek 'red lines' on military A.I., echoing Anthropic

#140

Post by nradov »

remarkEon wrote: post #113
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there any reason to think that autonomous weapons are a critical strategic capability? It's hard to see what an unpiloted drone can do that a remotely piloted drone can't, other than perhaps human rights violations.

The simple version: Weapons systems are quickly advancing to the point where many of them can navigate and operate independent of human control. The obvious question here is at which point do we give these platforms release authority for lethal weapons. It becomes impractical to require (or even imagine, really) there to be a human "pilot" operating every single drone when you have hundreds or thousands of them opera…

You're way behind. We gave those those platforms release authority for lethal weapons in 1979.

https://www.vp4association.com/aircraft-information-2/32-2/m...

Post reply on HN