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

I'm Getting a Whiff of Iain Banks' Culture

probablydance.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 54 posts

Re: I'm Getting a Whiff of Iain Banks' Culture

#31

Post by tao_oat »

This feels somewhat ahistorical.

The US has nearly always been successful in terms of conventional firepower and individual operations. E.g. in 2003 the US overthrew Saddam's government in a matter of weeks. The US won most battles in Vietnam. That doesn't change the fact that the strategic outcomes and long-term track record are poor. Trying to draw a link to AI or the current state of the US military feels flimsy.

Anyway, the recurring Big Question throughout the Culture series is "how should a highly progressive, developed, and egalitarian society act when it meets others who are not?". The US is sliding further and further from that ideal, and you can argue whether it was ever close.

Re: I'm Getting a Whiff of Iain Banks' Culture

#32

Post by L_226 »

kaashif wrote: post #3

> you just can’t play StarCraft that much better than the best humans I could not disagree with this more. Just the perfect micro part means that computers have a far higher ceiling than humans. No, it is not possible in theory for humans to have perfect micro with thousands of APM! We're talking about hundred unit zergling swarms perfectly dodging tank shells. Hundreds of APM at multiple locations on the map. Perfec…

> We're talking about hundred unit zergling swarms perfectly dodging tank shells.

Exactly the reference I was thinking of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKVFZ28ybQs

Re: I'm Getting a Whiff of Iain Banks' Culture

#33

Post by OkayPhysicist »

I think the author is making a mistake assigning the seemingly new competence of the US military to AI, rather than noticing that the US has spent the last half-century or so picking the kinds of fights we absolutely suck at.

Force projection, targeted aerial strikes, intelligence gathering, and a nuclear deterrent play to the US miltary's strengths. Convincing the people who we just whacked the leaders of to like us? Not at all. The US doesn't have the political will to commit the monstrous acts required to stomp out an insurgency, and we, as the big bad empire on the global stage, can't help but inspire insurgents.

If you look at the boondoggles that the US has gotten itself into post Korea, they typically follow a pattern of "we show up, complete the key objectives in the first couple of days, and then spend years occupying territory while trying to root out an insurgency, creating new insurgents at least as fast as we neutralize them, then eventually limp away with our tail between our legs."

Lately, we've been just doing the first part. Which is the part we've been good at for ages. No need to blame AI, it's just that we aren't / haven't gotten around to doing the part we suck at.

Re: I'm Getting a Whiff of Iain Banks' Culture

#35

Post by Matl »

jrowen wrote: post #28
Matl wrote: post #5

I perhaps get where the author is coming from at a very surface level, but the US is acting like a drunk Culture where the Minds face credible accusations of all sorts of abuse, are named something like 'I Got Small Dick, Wannu Make Everyone Think Is Big', have no goal beyond self-enrichment and ships that dump their human passengers into empty space with the promise that if they somehow survive the next time they co…

The analogy is about technology aiding operational efficiency. It ends there. You basically made a dramatic statement about Trump.

This behavior predates Trump. He's just an accelerationist of where this sort of behavior was always bound to go.

But he does perfectly demonstrate that you can't have operational efficiency if you're ignorant about your enemies because you're being advised by religious fanatics, if your goals are constantly shifting and your motives are purely selfish.

Re: I'm Getting a Whiff of Iain Banks' Culture

#36

Post by jrowen »

kaashif wrote: post #3

> you just can’t play StarCraft that much better than the best humans I could not disagree with this more. Just the perfect micro part means that computers have a far higher ceiling than humans. No, it is not possible in theory for humans to have perfect micro with thousands of APM! We're talking about hundred unit zergling swarms perfectly dodging tank shells. Hundreds of APM at multiple locations on the map. Perfec…

I think the "you" they refer to there is the hypothetical other skilled human, not a computer. The wording is confusing but I think they're just saying that the human players will reach a ceiling with each other (they then contrast this with real life where the ceiling is always moving). That whole paragraph is a bit muddy with the point it's trying to make.

Re: I'm Getting a Whiff of Iain Banks' Culture

#37

Post by harperlee »

A fundamental thing that this misses, I think, is that the reinforcement learning approaches of AlphaGo do generate that sensation of lack-of-narrative, everything together at the same time alien thinking, whereas using an LLM as hypothesized would have a clear tree-like approach with an overarching thesis, so the approach would be more traditional / human like.

Re: I'm Getting a Whiff of Iain Banks' Culture

#38

Post by relaxing »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #33

I think the author is making a mistake assigning the seemingly new competence of the US military to AI, rather than noticing that the US has spent the last half-century or so picking the kinds of fights we absolutely suck at. Force projection, targeted aerial strikes, intelligence gathering, and a nuclear deterrent play to the US miltary's strengths. Convincing the people who we just whacked the leaders of to like us…

We keep using AI to do things humans already do fine (putting on a bomb in a target.) Still no word on AI for things humans really suck at (lasting regime change.)

Re: I'm Getting a Whiff of Iain Banks' Culture

#40

Post by relaxing »

MrOrelliOReilly wrote: post #24

I have had the same hypothesis around the recent operational success of US military interventions, but would agree with other comments here that this is more "vibes" than data. It's been reported that Maven (integrated with Claude) has been used extensively for Iran, but I haven't seen any hard evidence this is directly contributing to greater US military efficiency. I do buy the general thesis that AI would support…

The AI fans desperately need their god to not be perceived as icky.
Post reply on HN