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

OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon

semafor.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 509 posts

Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon

#141

Post by Jackson__ »

fourside wrote: post #21
KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #4

This is the sort of thing that becomes possible after dropping the ethical members of their board.

I wonder how the OpenAI employees feel about this after their full throated support for reinstating Altman and the shuffling of the previous board.

I'd assume some of them would feel pretty bad. And if the board had actually said that this was the reason they ousted Sam Altman, said employees would have supported the board.

But none of that happened, and so the employees got to choose between a charismatic man with a impressively quickly put together plan, and a group of headless chickens running in circles.

Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon

#142

Post by halJordan »

cm2012 wrote: post #94

The future of warfare is AI powered drones, zero doubt in my mind. Imagine the micro from Starcraft Go on a real life drone with a gun and bombs.

Missiles and planes are already using ai algorithms to seek, fix, close, maneuver all those things.

It's some sort of uncanny valley, too close to home vibe that suddenly its a problem that the plane's airframe is directed by a an ai algorithm.

Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon

#143

Post by amrocha »

scottLobster wrote: post #138
amrocha wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could make literally the opposite argument. Other countries antagonize the US because of its military interventionism. If the US had lower military spending, other countries wouldn't feel the need to be aggressive. It's childish to be pro military. It shows you think arbitrary lines on a map determine who's good or bad.

Yeah, I'm sure Russia and China would be far less aggressive if the US had lower military spending. What you're suggesting is the geopolitical equivalent of "ignore the bully and they'll get bored and go away". And you call others childish?

No, we just have a different perspective. USA is the bully, not the rest of the world. Any country that grows powerful enough to get in the eye of the USA needs a strong military, because the USA has a military and a record of interventionism that can't be ignored.

Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon

#144

Post by bigstrat2003 »

binsquare wrote: post #128

They haven't changed their principles page yet: https://openai.com/safety-standards ``` Minimize harm We will build safety into our AI tools where possible, and work hard to aggressively reduce harms posed by the misuse or abuse of our AI tools. ``` And I think they can still do that. If they corner every big usecase while they are the top ai models - they get to set the standard and define safety for all upcoming ai…

> If not openai, it would have been some other company...

This does not justify anything and never has. I'm not even saying that what OpenAI is doing is bad (I don't think it's inherently bad to work with the military). But if one believes that it is bad, then "well someone was going to do it so it may as well be them" doesn't remotely hold water.

Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon

#145

Post by halJordan »

dogman144 wrote: post #29
idopmstuff wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the right take. AI on the battlefield is a foregone conclusion, so it behooves us to understand and implement AI earlier, rather than later. That way we can do it in a measured and tested way; the alterative is realizing our lack of AI is causing us to lose a war and accelerating implementation of it as much as possible with less regard for safety.

“behoove” in a discussion about tech and the military is where worlds collide. The favorite word of mixed-ly educated, immensely powerful senior enlisted. I’ve been told what behooves me many a time but this is the first time that AI has behooved me.

I've found that the people who complain about the word behoove are the ones least likely to understand the word's meaning.

Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon

#146

Post by beambot »

andrewstuart wrote: post #116

I was brought up in a household that was anti military. Only as an adult was I able to form my own opinion. Without a strong military in the past we would certainly not be here today and without a strong military now, who knows what other nation might decide to attack our sovereignty. It's childish to be anti military - it shows you do not understand the interconnectedness of our society - good and bad.

Note: There's a big difference between "military" and "military industrial complex", and even Dwight Eisenhower cautioned against the latter...

Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon

#147

Post by amrocha »

andrewstuart wrote: post #139
amrocha wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could make literally the opposite argument. Other countries antagonize the US because of its military interventionism. If the US had lower military spending, other countries wouldn't feel the need to be aggressive. It's childish to be pro military. It shows you think arbitrary lines on a map determine who's good or bad.

That's the world view that my family came from - very leftist and peace loving. "If only everyone put down their guns there would be no need etc etc". But it's not the world we live in - we live in a military world - that's real and not a hope/fantasy about a different civilisation without war or weapons. We have to have a society suited to the world we live in. And by the way I remain very much left wing and at the…

You talk about a country defending itself as if that's what militaries do. The US military has been intervening in the world stage for 80 years at this point.

Take any country below the equator and chances are the US has probably used its military against it. That's not defence. You don't collaborate with that actor if you think defence is the goal.

Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon

#148

Post by amrocha »

scottLobster wrote: post #135
amrocha wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Say that again when they use AI to spy on you even more than they already do

That's a political problem, and requires a political solution.

The political solution is to not partner with the Pentagon

Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon

#149

Post by dbtc »

andrewstuart wrote: post #139
amrocha wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could make literally the opposite argument. Other countries antagonize the US because of its military interventionism. If the US had lower military spending, other countries wouldn't feel the need to be aggressive. It's childish to be pro military. It shows you think arbitrary lines on a map determine who's good or bad.

That's the world view that my family came from - very leftist and peace loving. "If only everyone put down their guns there would be no need etc etc". But it's not the world we live in - we live in a military world - that's real and not a hope/fantasy about a different civilisation without war or weapons. We have to have a society suited to the world we live in. And by the way I remain very much left wing and at the…

Be pragmatic for the present, but also spare some hope for the future.

Re: OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon

#150

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

Aeolun wrote: post #95
2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #59

Good! I'm tired of all of the SV companies presupposing that government work must be unethical. Even if the work is for weapons, having the largest advantage possible will prevent or shorten wars and save lives. Do you want your sons and daughters to fight a fair fight?

> Do you want your sons and daughters to fight a fair fight? I don’t want them to fight at all. But more importantly, I don’t want anyone friend or “foe” to die from faulty AI decisions. I can sort of reconcile some human bomber pilot making a mistake and hitting a family home, but if AI does the same thing it’s just wrong.

> I don’t want them to fight at all.

Me either.

> I don’t want anyone friend or “foe” to die from faulty AI decisions.

Me either. I'm going to assume they'll do more than 5 minutes of homework on AI

Post reply on HN