I clearly see the point against using AI for mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons. But for the latter, I don't see a choice. If other countries are willing to allow fully autonomous weapons using their own AI, it's no longer a matter of choice, you have to do it too.
We Will Not Be Divided
621–630 of 912 posts
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#622Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Or perhaps you think the US could stop us using the 12nm fabs being built by TSMC on European soil? Being built as in not operating yet? 12 nm gpu is what? Nvidia 1080/2060 level? Those top researchers mentioned would love to train on that. Also how many gpus would be made annually? Also what about CPU? You gonna use risc-v? With what toolchain? Chinese could pull it off in a few years, yeah. EU? Nah. Started think…
Things can change quickly. Give it a decade.
Nvidia uses RISC-V as the main controller cores in its GPUs. They’re also exploring replacing their Arm CPU with RISC-V I hear.
Meta recently bought Rivos in a huge show of confidence for RISC-V across processor types for server class.
As for fabrication, the poster above has a lot to learn about both the US’ current weak at-home capabilities (and everything they’re building relies on European suppliers for all the key technology and machines etc.) and about the scaling properties of sub-14nm nodes. Any export controls or sanctions to prevent Europe using American-designed Taiwan-manufactured chips would result in American being cutoff from everything they need to build fabs on US soil. It would backfire massively.
Lastly, the UK and EU already have cutting edge AI Inference chips, and the ones for training are coming this year. Full stack integration (server box, racks, etc) is also being developed this year. We’re not a decade away from doing this - we’re 18 months away. Deployment at scale will take longer - not having Nvidia as competition would be a huge boon for that haha!
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#623Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dario is being ruled out due to ideological standing Makes perfect sense
Yep. Everyone is over thinking it. There would have been a conversation between Hegseth and Trump that went something like: This guy thinks he can tell us what we can and can’t do. Get rid of him. It’s that simple.
He is a horrible public presenter. He presents himself as someone who is nervous, validation seeking, yet it is stupid of you to not trust him.
He lacks confidence yet feels incredibly arrogant.
He would succeed in academia as the principal of some prestige university with this exterior, not as CEO of an AI company.
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#624I clearly see the point against using AI for mass surveillance and fully autonomous weapons. But for the latter, I don't see a choice. If other countries are willing to allow fully autonomous weapons using their own AI, it's no longer a matter of choice, you have to do it too.
The same could be said of mass producing chemical and biological weapons.
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#625The beauty of balance is someone can say yes and someone can say no. No matter how good do you calculate there is theory behind.
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#626The best way for AI companies to fight this would be to remind those who request this capability that the AI knows exactly where they live, where they hang out, and that any one of them can also be targeted by a rogue AI system with no human in the loop. Capabilities that they are requesting could jeopardize them, their personal assets, and their families if something goes haywire or, in the much more common case, wh…
The best way for government to fight that would be to remind those who refuse to comply with their demands that the government already knows exactly where they live, where they hang out, and that any one of them can also be targeted by a three letter agency or thrown into Guantánamo Bay. The government has been building and maintaining massive dossiers on everyone. They already have the ability to plant or fabricate…
Yes, but this is the same government, where the ministry of war chief Hegseth added random people to a secret chat on signal. If leadership messes up with 0 consequence, you can guess what happens at the lower ranks. In other words, they ain't so competent as you make it sound they are.
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#627Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Who in their right minds wants to have the military have the capabilities to do mass surveillance of their own citizens? Who in their right minds wants to have the US military have the capability to carry out an unprovoked first strike on Moscow, thereby triggering WW3, bringing about nuclear armageddon? And yet, do contracts for nuclear-armed missiles (Boeing for the current LGM-30 Minuteman ICBMs, Northrop Grumma…
Anthropic doesn't object to fully autonomous AI use by the military in principle. What they're saying is that their current models are not fit for that purpose. That's not the same thing as delivering a weapon that has a certain capability but then put policy restrictions on its use, which is what your comparison suggests. The key question here is who gets to decide whether or not a particular version of a model is s…
Let me put it this way–if Boeing is developing a new missile, and they say to the Pentagon–"this missile can't be used yet, it isn't safe"–and the Pentagon replies "we don't care, we'll bear that risk, send us the prototype, we want to use it right now"–how does Boeing respond?
I expect they'll ask the Pentagon to sign a liability disclaimer and then send it anyway.
Whereas, Anthropic is saying they'll refuse to let the Pentagon use their technology in ways they consider unsafe, even if Pentagon indemnifies Anthropic for the consequences. That's very different from how Boeing would behave.
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#628The USA showed itself to be a Command Economy that uses 'private enterprise' as a fascade of legitimacy during Covid. Without government spending, employment, and contracts, the USA would be net negative growth. Now the DoD, who are by far the largest budgetary expense for the tax payer, wants us to believe they don't have a better Ai than current industry? That is a double sword admission; either they are exposing t…
At some point in the not so distant future, it seems entirely likely for the US to bail out OpenAI / Nvidia / etc using national security as justification. Democrats and Republicans really can get along as long as their donors get what they want. No matter how the regime changes in the coming years, the DoD will keep getting funding, and that funding will increasingly go to vendors who don't mind killing people.
Eisenhower warned of the military-industrial complex, and 60 years later it's eating everyone's lunch.
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#629Among other consequences, if Anthropic ends up being killed it’s going to be just another nail in the coffin of trust in America. Companies who subscribed will find themselves without an important tool because the president went on a rant, and might wonder if it’s safe to depend on other American companies.
Oh come on. Saying “no” is not eroding trust, it’s taking a stand. When the US banded human embryo research did that erode trust? I didn’t hear anything about that at the time.
Don't you know enforcing whats best for your citizens clearly erodes trust? Just keep selling off your future for short term gains! Anything else is heckin problematic :(
Re: We Will Not Be Divided
#630Earlier quoted context omitted.
Okay, if you have big actions to show off, then show us how it’s done. You step up and start shooting at the heartless monsters running the first (US armed forces) and second (ICE) most well-funded militaries in the world. Go ahead. We’ll be right there behind you. (Yeah, I’m burning some hn karma for this, I imagine.)
Thank you for giving an example of what I’m talking about. You’re there fantasising about armed conflict when there are a million different actions one can take. But nope, only words, words and more words.
It's part of the dismal/pathetic form of American exceptionalism that's taken root in the last decade.
"We mustn't consider dealing with problem x because it wasn't considered important by our founding fathers"
"China are catching up, so we need to cower behind a tariff wall rather than risk losing an open competition"
"Other countries with similar legal systems have successfully reformed their supreme courts, but there's nothing we can learn from them"
"We shouldn't constrain rogue leaders because of, er, something to do with King George III"
...and now "we can't push back against the regime, because they'll shoot us if we do".
It's so weird - a huge shift in such a short period of time. As an outsider who wishes America well, it's really sad to see.