4 ms·
The premises here range from true to arguable. 1) AI/ML is a dual use technology, one with both civilian and military uses...plausible. Worth noting that ITAR*
by avsteele 7y ago
The premises here range from true to arguable.
1) AI/ML is a dual use technology, one with both civilian and military uses...plausible. Worth noting that ITAR* already restricts transfer of a variety of technologies to others. Maybe AI/ML should count?
2) China is the enemy of the US...debatable
3) Google's presence in China gives it government greater access to these tech's than it otherwise would have...plausible
Seems like a generic opinion piece to me.
*
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_Regulations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Traffic_in_Arms_...
- curt15 7y ago> 3) Google's presence in China gives it government greater access to these tech's than it otherwise would have...plausible Even if Google didn't have an office in China, Chinese researchers could just as well learn from NIPS proceedings, etc.
- espeed 7y agoThis is not about NIPS proceedings. It's about advanced nextgen chip hardware capability, something China does not have. It would be like giving someone a rocketship when they don't know how to build and pilot a plane. Inorganic technology transfers -- phase shifts like this -- are ripe for disaster. Without internal time-tested checks and balances, gifting the gap is a recipe for chaos -- NOT a recipe for containment. How long will the chaos last? Hard to see. Does anyone have a model for that? It could lead to their undoing, and others' too. Haven't we learned that lesson yet?