I see a headline like this and think, “oh fuck they’re definitely developing that, if they haven’t already.”
this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
156 points (96.4% liked)
News
23296 readers
4149 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
"We promise to think about it reaaaallly hard before we do it and then we'll feel bad afterwards"
i thought exactly the same thing.! Welp i know what they are working on next/currently/already deployed
You didn't think Skynet could exist?
My dude, not only could it exist, it's already been here. For years.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SKYNET_(surveillance_program)
I wonder what AI is defined as for this. Because no way is the US giving up it's advanced targeting and senior fusion capabilities, which some would call AI from the broad definition.
Probably about not letting AI decide when to pull the trigger but do everything else, and then have a human press the button to do the actual firing.
But can the person 'pulling the trigger' be back in the command bunker saying kill the enemy looking aircraft you find in this area? Because you're not always going to have a reliable communications link the whole way. And that's pretty much what beyond visual rage missiles do already.
Well I think they could say that and the unit would then respond with x possible targets and the human operator would need to give the ultimate go-ahead. Point being that it would be bad if you have a bot with a machine gun and you tell it to kill everyone hostile with a gun in this area and it blasts that 13 yo kid with a fucking stick. They could identify targets, but a human would have to be the one okaying them.
If you lose communications then you're shit out of luck. Though I guess you would have some backup system like if comms fail go back to base or hunker down etc and wait.
Probably yes.
Neither the US or China is going to honor this. We all know that. I’d rather be comfortable with some body that mandates war-time guidelines ala Geneva conventions than outright bans, which don’t really work
Problem is doing that violates the principal of national sovereignty, which is basically the underpinning of how the entire international system works post WWII
Yhe but if they do humanity loses soooo
Edit:humany loses if they don't honor, that's all I'm saying
How about pledging not to start any more wars?
I mean, why would that stop anyone? Better to try and remove the reasons for war.
So people?
I was thinking more bargaining barriers, imperfect information, and perverse incentives. But getting rid of people would also technically work I suppose.
Edit: Oops, I guess barriers to being a bartender cause wars now
Lol, your reply is better.
He would money be made if we didn’t profit on wars and politics?
And Russia sees their chance to finally grab the advantage.
There is zero chance AI won't end up in weapons, no matter what treaties are signed, because there is no putting the cap back on this bottle.
WE ARE DOOOOMED. ;)
There is no chance AI isn't already in weapons.
The next headline: _ Israel set to use AI in autonomous weapons like drones, nuclear warhead control: sources_
Counter:
Both should build the ultimate AI warriors and henceforth settle all conflicts with a battle royal.
nuclear warhead control
Have they not seen, like, any Hollywood movie about an AI in control of nuclear weapons?
Would you like to play a game?
Yes yes we will certainly not develop AI controlled warheads 🤞
Well, we know what weapon platform the CCP is implementing now. Heavy into AI.
I would assume that this agreement would only be regarding fully autonomous AI. That is, AI that are able to act independently and make the decision to strike without human intervention. I don't see the US agreeing to give up the drones that are supposed to be flying wingman to future fighters.
Or, given the source, this article could just be intended to pressure the US to agree to restrictions, and to set the stage for being outraged if they don't.
How open is Pandora's box? That is the real question. This may be seen as a bigger move in the future.
I could imagine Biden and Dems upholding their end, Drones are an inaccurate enough problem tactic when you've got a trained airman on the cam doing confirmation flyovers. I could see SOME republicans doing the same for the same reason.
Trump would straight up be measuring mission success by how much collateral that could have happened did happen. Like the man would ban the use of the flying ginsu for not being terrifying enough because it only shreds the area of a medium sized car with all those spring out blades.
Xi, I think Xi will gesture towards the internationally perceived "right answer" while pretty openly making sure all options remain available to his command. Xi is definitely that guy who measures his chess performance by how many options he's kept open even into the closing phases of the game.