For any given effect you want, nukes are better than conventional bombing. It's just that for a lot of people they are kind of a taboo.
AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
141–150 of 281 posts
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#142I've spoken with engineers who worked on nuclear weapons systems, the consensus is that the public is deeply misinformed about how they work, the dangers, and the implications of weapons being used. The AI is actually right here. The biggest danger of a nuclear weapon is being hit by flying debris. Fusion airburst bombs of the modern era are incredibly clean and radiation is only a risk in a very small area (tens of…
Would they really be intercepted though? IIUC, no country on Earth has an appreciable number of antiballistic missiles, and the success rate isn’t great.
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#143I'm not scared about AI recommending nuclear strikes, I'm scared about the human behind the keyboard delegating reasoning and responsability to something they think is always correct, something that can hide bias and flaws better than anything.
Some of the most reassuring and scariest things you can read are about the incidents that have already occurred where computers said "launch all the nukes" and the humans refused. On the one hand, good news! We have prior art that says humans don't just launch all the nukes just because the computers or procedures say to. Bad news, it's been skin-of-our-teeth multiple times already. https://www.warhistoryonline.com/c…
> We have prior art that says humans don't just launch all the nukes just because the computers or procedures say to.
previously no-one had spent trillions of dollars trying to convince the world that those computers were "Artificial Intelligence"
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#144I've spoken with engineers who worked on nuclear weapons systems, the consensus is that the public is deeply misinformed about how they work, the dangers, and the implications of weapons being used. The AI is actually right here. The biggest danger of a nuclear weapon is being hit by flying debris. Fusion airburst bombs of the modern era are incredibly clean and radiation is only a risk in a very small area (tens of…
> it wouldn't be the "end of humanity" or anything even remotely like it
It's very likely that a nuclear conflict between major nuclear-armed states (US, China, Russia, but it could be starting in India or Pakistan as well) would bring an end to humanity as we mean it today.
I really hope that behind all the today's communication bullshit there are deep state masterminds that do not have personal interest in dominating a doomed world.
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#145I've spoken with engineers who worked on nuclear weapons systems, the consensus is that the public is deeply misinformed about how they work, the dangers, and the implications of weapons being used. The AI is actually right here. The biggest danger of a nuclear weapon is being hit by flying debris. Fusion airburst bombs of the modern era are incredibly clean and radiation is only a risk in a very small area (tens of…
> Fusion airburst bombs of the modern era are incredibly clean
Are all potential adversaries up to date on this?
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#146I've spoken with engineers who worked on nuclear weapons systems, the consensus is that the public is deeply misinformed about how they work, the dangers, and the implications of weapons being used. The AI is actually right here. The biggest danger of a nuclear weapon is being hit by flying debris. Fusion airburst bombs of the modern era are incredibly clean and radiation is only a risk in a very small area (tens of…
Take away modern infrastructure in a flash or light and see what percentage of people are still alive in a year.
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#147To me, this seems logical, in a sense. As a human who grew up during the Cold War, nuclear conflict is horrifying. From an AI standpoint, a nuclear strike likely has several benefits: - It reduces friendly casualties and probably overall enemy casualties. - It shortens conflict time. - Reduces damage to infrastructure. (Rebuild costs) - Is likely cheaper to deploy overall, compared to conventional weapons. This assum…
it's not logical, at all
it more or less guarantees the other side will retaliate with nuclear weapons
at which point the likelihood of escalation to strategic nuclear strikes goes through the roof
and if that happens our current civilisation is finished
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#148Why is this surprising? Nuclear weapons are available. AI has limited real world experience or grasp of the consequences. Nuke 'em seems like the obvious choice --- for something with a grade school mentality. Similar deficits in reasoning are manifested in AI results every day. Let's fire 'em and hire AI seems like the obvious choice --- for someone with a grade school mentality and blinded by greed.
> Nuke 'em seems like the obvious choice
Only if you take off first, and do it from orbit. It's the only way to be sure
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#149I've spoken with engineers who worked on nuclear weapons systems, the consensus is that the public is deeply misinformed about how they work, the dangers, and the implications of weapons being used. The AI is actually right here. The biggest danger of a nuclear weapon is being hit by flying debris. Fusion airburst bombs of the modern era are incredibly clean and radiation is only a risk in a very small area (tens of…
>The biggest danger of a nuclear weapon is being hit by flying debris.
I thought it was being burned alive in the resulting firestorm because the intense light starts fires over a large area: way beyond the blast zone. This risk could be reduced if we painted everything white- a double win since it would also help reduce the city heat island effect.
Re: AIs can't stop recommending nuclear strikes in war game simulations
#150I've spoken with engineers who worked on nuclear weapons systems, the consensus is that the public is deeply misinformed about how they work, the dangers, and the implications of weapons being used. The AI is actually right here. The biggest danger of a nuclear weapon is being hit by flying debris. Fusion airburst bombs of the modern era are incredibly clean and radiation is only a risk in a very small area (tens of…
Well thank you for your input General Le May but the consensus is still that zero nukes is the best choice for humans in particular.