3 ms·
To play devil's advocate: why is it dark? If an AI can process significantly more data than us humans to find actionable intelligence is that not a good thing?
by jonnybgood 9y ago
To play devil's advocate: why is it dark? If an AI can process significantly more data than us humans to find actionable intelligence is that not a good thing? Imagine a building is on a strike list and the intelligence on it needs to be revetted. An analyst pulls in SIGINT, GEOINT, OSINT, HUMINT, etc. The analyst has 48 hours to get his products uploaded for battlefield commanders to make an air strike or not. The analyst can't possibly process all the data in time. The analyst assesses it's a weapons cache based on what they can process. In reality, it was a makeshift hospital. This is how mistakes happen in war.
- FLUX-YOU 9y ago>why is it dark? I doubt the training data/AI will be accountable or visible to the citizens (yes, the analyst gets fired/van'd, but someone else takes his place). So we're trusting the intel agencies, but they're trusting an AI to some extent. They're plainly not dumb enough to let the AI drive, but it still plays a part. I'm not worried about an AI being able to sift data given a training set to some degree of accuracy. I'm more worried about the training set as a dark way of generating actionable intelligence, for good or bad purposes.
- jonnybgood 9y agoAll things used in war is a double-edged sword. Unfortunately, that's the reality of it. Personally, the benefits of AI in intelligence outweighs the costs from my own experience.
- dTal 9y agoWhich is why a permanent war posture is a frightening thing in a government. I'm curious about your personal experience of the benefits and costs of AI in intelligence? It seems unlikely that you will have been on the receiving end of the full potential cost of that AI.
- mirimir 9y agoAs always, it depends on whose ox is getting gored. And how likely it is that you will be confused with that ox.
- zitterbewegung 9y agoOr you know someone creates a system which and overfits the data and makes the same mistake.
- etiam 9y agoI'll admit my previous post was thin on substance. Sure, if you believe that a radical increase in capacity to surveil everyone and exert overwhelming violence against anyone with absolute obedience would certainly never be used to destroy the lives of politically inconvenient people and tear innocents off to torture or extrajudicial assassinations, I guess it's all sunshine and fluffy bunnies.