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

Where things stand with the Department of War

anthropic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 862 posts

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#351

Post by dotancohen »

the_af wrote: post #338
dotancohen wrote: post #274

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Putting real lives on the line makes war a costly last resort. Be grateful that you live in a culture that feels this way, and protect that culture. Not all cultures share this value.

True, but this doesn't in any way undermine the point that making war easier is not a good thing. It should be a costly decision, lest leaders of even those cultures find it too appealing.

In general I agree. 100% agree.

But the AI cat-for-war has left the box for both Iran and the US. Opposing US development of AI for warfare will not suppress US's adversaries from developing the technology.

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#352

Post by [deleted] »

renewiltord wrote: post #335
agigao wrote: post #140

Around 10 years ago, in college, in Calculus class I had a very ambitious classmate, wanted to go to DARPA and work on Robotics. I asked if he was thinking it through solely from technical perspective or considering ethics side as well. Clearly, he didn't understand the question and I directly inquired - what if the code you write or autonomous machine you contribute to used for killing? His response - that's not my…

The one industry that people dislike that I haven’t been in is war. I hope to be in weapons one day. The ethics are pretty straightforward to me: kill as few as possible to protect your interests; and that may be many people; but it is not really that many people. Anyway, I won’t guess at your friend’s motivation but if you gave me the ability to make America’s industry better at prosecuting war you’d better believe…

[deleted]

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#354

Post by godelski »

komali2 wrote: post #311
somenameforme wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

People keep making this strange claim about Taiwan, the only liberal democracy in the East without a single American soldier on its soil. Almost like Taiwan is a sovereign nation uninterested in participating in the PRC and USA's fight for global hegemony.

I think the funniest part is the fact that all the western countries are even afraid to recognize Taiwan's independence. It's a much better argument to say Korea or Japan are ruled by the US (and Korea and Japan absolutely hate one another!).

Does the US have influence in Taiwan? Certainly! But if that meant Taiwan was the US's puppet then Taiwan would simultaneously be China's puppet. Schrödinger's Vassal

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#355

Post by FpUser »

the_af wrote: post #334
FpUser wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"Russia and China did not have the means to help Venezuela" Of course they have the means. Nothing technical prohibits them from blowing couple of carriers. But the price they would have to pay is way too high.

Did you mean Venezuela or Iran? Because there are actual technical impediments why neither China nor the Russians could have blown a US carrier in the Caribbean.

>"actual technical impediments"

I do not believe so. Not unsurmountable at least. The consequences are however far from pleasant for each side

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#356

Post by wzm »

hglaser wrote: post #18

It is incredible how far the overton window has moved on this issue. When I graduated in 2007, it was common for tech companies to refuse to let their systems be used for war, and it was an ordinary thing when some of my graduating classmates refused to work at companies that did let their systems be used for war. Those refusals were on moral grounds. Now Anthropic wants to have two narrow exceptions, on pragmatic an…

> I have told my sons that they are not under any circumstances to take part in massacres, and that the news of massacres of enemies is not to fill them with satisfaction or glee.

> I have also told them not to work for companies which make massacre machinery, and to express contempt for people who think we need machinery like that.

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#357

Post by arttaboi »

bfung wrote: post #206

I don’t feel that old, but I guess being 45 is ancient in tech. The Silicon Valley tech jobs we have now has a history rooted in World War 2 and funding of it by the US gov. https://youtu.be/ZTC_RxWN_xo?si=gGza5eIv485xEKLS I’m not saying war is good or anything, but also don't ride a high horse cause none of it would be here w/o WW2.

Thanks for sharing. This is very interesting.

Watching this, I realised one thing: Germans, once upon a time phenomenally intelligent folks, got eroded by a bunch of stupid politicians’ ambitions.

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#358

Post by jedberg »

hax0ron3 wrote: post #287
BryantD wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also in Good Will Hunting , when Will (Matt Damon) delivers a scathing job rejection to the NSA. 1997. The War on Terror has a lot to answer for. https://youtu.be/tH0bTpwQL7U

The late 90s were full of media that questioned reality and authority - like X-Files, The Matrix, Dark City, all sorts of websites about conspiracy theories and UFOs, etc. The zeitgeist was full of speculation about hidden truths. The cultural mood was defiant and sardonic. There was rap, rap-rock, Beavis and Butthead, Fight Club, Office Space... One of the most popular pro wrestlers in the world played a character w…

Gen-X was making the popular new art at the time. It was a strong reflection of the feelings of our generation. We were (maybe still are?) known for not liking authority.

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#359

Post by queenkjuul »

dotancohen wrote: post #347
komali2 wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We're talking about Americans. What genuine threat did Venezuela or Iran pose to Americans ? Corporate interests don't count.

Do you not perceive a threat from a country with nuclear capability that chants "Death to America, Death to Israel" to be a threat to America? Venezuela I don't know about, but Iran was (is) most certainly a threat to America.

Iran has no nuclear weapons and no weapons capable of striking the US

Re: Where things stand with the Department of War

#360

Post by yoyohello13 »

jadar wrote: post #299
fadesibert wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you are waiting until undergraduate level to take ethics, it's far too late to matter anyways. Doubly so for "business ethics" classes which became à la mode in the post-Enron era. They attempt to teach fundamental ethics, when at most it should be a very thin layer on top of a well founded internal moral framework and well-accepted ethical standards inculcated from day 1 of kindergarten. Morals are taught 0-9 [0]…

[flagged]

All of our current leaders as using God to justify their terrible actions. So religion doesn’t seem to be very good at teaching morals either.
Post reply on HN