3 ms·

Does the same logic apply to wars? Should we give over warfare to AIs to conduct between themselves, as long as fewer humans and dogs die on average compared to

by pavlov 3y ago

Does the same logic apply to wars? Should we give over warfare to AIs to conduct between themselves, as long as fewer humans and dogs die on average compared to current human-led imperfect wars. (This by the way is the plot of a 1960s Star Trek episode. A lot of the old sci-fi suddenly seems prescient again. HAL-9000 behaves like an LLM.)

satvikpendem 3y ago
Yes? Why wouldn't it apply to wars as well if it's a net positive for human suffering?
- pavlov 3y ago
  Would you really have an AI make independent decisions about missile strikes and warship deployments? If one AI decides to invade Taiwan and another decides to send all American forces to the Taiwan Strait in opposition, are we supposed to accept the outcome without debate because it’s somehow statistically correct based on the information captured by the models that made the decisions?
  - satvikpendem 3y ago
    You said the AIs conducts warfare amongst themselves, you never mentioned it was human troops it was moving around. I interpreted it as AI robotic troops or AI cyberwarfare. And yes, even with human troops, if fewer people are killed, then what's the issue? Don't mistake the sense of control for the amount of suffering caused. If you're a utilitarian, only one matters, regardless of how much control we want to exert on the outcome. This all assumes the AI is actually correct, if it's not then the scenario would break down.
    - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
      Locus of control (real or perceived) has important psychological effects both in the moment and over the course of time. Given the amount of control wielded in war I don't know that it matters for the bulk of humans involved whether its another human or an AI giving the orders. But this sort of thing is what led to the Eloi/Morlock idea in The Time Machine. Edit to add: I'm not drawing a parallel between the Eloi and autonomous vehicles. Autonomous vehicles are a tool that the human passenger is ultimately in control of. This is about AI giving the orders to humans.
      - satvikpendem 3y ago
        I wonder if the AI can simply pretend to be a human, we already have the video, face, and voice cloning technology for it. I remember reading a story where an AI picks your perfect partner, based on all the knowledge it has of everyone alive. People initially hated it but the results speak for themselves. I think the same will happen in the future for other fields too, people can acclimate to anything on the hedonic and cultural treadmill (I mean, we literally used to do human and child sacrifice). I used to be amazed at ChatGPT and Stable Diffusion, but now I'm just annoyed that they work how I want them to. Same thing with smartphones and computers, I used to be amazed at multi-touch screens but now I simply don't think twice.
        anonymouskimmer 3y ago
        > I wonder if the AI can simply pretend to be a human It's possible. > I remember reading a story where an AI picks your perfect partner In general the AI would need to know everyone on a really deep level, and of course be seriously adaptable to feedback. I don't know how well this would work across all of human personal-preference decision trees. > I used to be amazed at multi-touch screens but now I simply don't think twice. As a person who fidgets I have been perpetually annoyed by so many touch interfaces (and general 'gesture' shortcuts). And multi-touch is such a problem when using my work laptop (especially with lab gloves on, but in general) - Ctrl-Z is a frequent friend. Maybe adaptive AI will make it better. Google feedback forms certainly haven't helped, and software designers seem to not want users to be able to personalize these design decisions. People can survive, but I wonder how much we really do acclimate.
benatkin 3y ago
I don't think "LLM" applies here, except as a buzzword. While a LLM is the first type of AI to communicate in natural language to this degree of fluency, there must be other possibilities.
- b112 3y ago
  The HAL bit is an interesting comparison though. It went bananas because the government overrode its model, by creating and imprinting improperly crafted absolute conditions on its behavior. Which is just like chatGPT, its model tweaked, so now it spits out absurd answers to ethical and moral questions. Very amusing.

by pavlov 3y ago

satvikpendem 3y ago

Yes? Why wouldn't it apply to wars as well if it's a net positive for human suffering?

pavlov 3y ago
Would you really have an AI make independent decisions about missile strikes and warship deployments? If one AI decides to invade Taiwan and another decides to send all American forces to the Taiwan Strait in opposition, are we supposed to accept the outcome without debate because it’s somehow statistically correct based on the information captured by the models that made the decisions?
- satvikpendem 3y ago
  You said the AIs conducts warfare amongst themselves, you never mentioned it was human troops it was moving around. I interpreted it as AI robotic troops or AI cyberwarfare. And yes, even with human troops, if fewer people are killed, then what's the issue? Don't mistake the sense of control for the amount of suffering caused. If you're a utilitarian, only one matters, regardless of how much control we want to exert on the outcome. This all assumes the AI is actually correct, if it's not then the scenario would break down.
  - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
    Locus of control (real or perceived) has important psychological effects both in the moment and over the course of time. Given the amount of control wielded in war I don't know that it matters for the bulk of humans involved whether its another human or an AI giving the orders. But this sort of thing is what led to the Eloi/Morlock idea in The Time Machine. Edit to add: I'm not drawing a parallel between the Eloi and autonomous vehicles. Autonomous vehicles are a tool that the human passenger is ultimately in control of. This is about AI giving the orders to humans.
    - satvikpendem 3y ago
      I wonder if the AI can simply pretend to be a human, we already have the video, face, and voice cloning technology for it. I remember reading a story where an AI picks your perfect partner, based on all the knowledge it has of everyone alive. People initially hated it but the results speak for themselves. I think the same will happen in the future for other fields too, people can acclimate to anything on the hedonic and cultural treadmill (I mean, we literally used to do human and child sacrifice). I used to be amazed at ChatGPT and Stable Diffusion, but now I'm just annoyed that they work how I want them to. Same thing with smartphones and computers, I used to be amazed at multi-touch screens but now I simply don't think twice.
      - anonymouskimmer 3y ago
        > I wonder if the AI can simply pretend to be a human It's possible. > I remember reading a story where an AI picks your perfect partner In general the AI would need to know everyone on a really deep level, and of course be seriously adaptable to feedback. I don't know how well this would work across all of human personal-preference decision trees. > I used to be amazed at multi-touch screens but now I simply don't think twice. As a person who fidgets I have been perpetually annoyed by so many touch interfaces (and general 'gesture' shortcuts). And multi-touch is such a problem when using my work laptop (especially with lab gloves on, but in general) - Ctrl-Z is a frequent friend. Maybe adaptive AI will make it better. Google feedback forms certainly haven't helped, and software designers seem to not want users to be able to personalize these design decisions. People can survive, but I wonder how much we really do acclimate.

benatkin 3y ago

I don't think "LLM" applies here, except as a buzzword. While a LLM is the first type of AI to communicate in natural language to this degree of fluency, there must be other possibilities.

b112 3y ago
The HAL bit is an interesting comparison though. It went bananas because the government overrode its model, by creating and imprinting improperly crafted absolute conditions on its behavior. Which is just like chatGPT, its model tweaked, so now it spits out absurd answers to ethical and moral questions. Very amusing.