20 ms·
OpenAI drops ban on military tools to partner with The Pentagon
- ouraf 3y agoThe conclusion is incomplete, though: why would OpenAI remove the military arbitrary search ban from the most popular part of the platform rather than making a MVP specifically to present the pentagon or other government actors? they could add all the controversial bits into a private and contained profile or application. There's something else happening that led to this. Maybe something mundane (a bug in the code or a hack to fix another bug that allowed more dangerous output as a side effect), but "to court the government" is an overly simplistic answer.
- dannykwells 3y ago[flagged]
- autoexec 3y agoYeah, if this were a company with more integrity I might suspect that the US gov forced their hand, but in this case I'm guessing that it was just greed.
- yoyohello13 3y ago[flagged]
- KaoruAoiShiho 3y agoThis is the sort of thing that becomes possible after dropping the ethical members of their board.
- fourside 3y agoI wonder how the OpenAI employees feel about this after their full throated support for reinstating Altman and the shuffling of the previous board.
- paxys 3y agoI'm $ure they feel okay about it
- ttul 3y agoNothing a few million can’t make better with some effective altruism sprinkled about.
- scarmig 3y agoIt's a very comfy feeling to fall asleep on top of piles of cash.
- sebzim4500 3y agoI've noticed that, in my circles at least, after Russia's invasion of Ukraine working in defence is no longer considered inherently immoral. Maybe they don't see anything wrong with it either.
- rightbyte 3y agoI don't think people change that fast. The main difference is that being anti-war seems to have come to be associated with a social cost, I think.
- Jackson__ 3y agoI'd assume some of them would feel pretty bad. And if the board had actually said that this was the reason they ousted Sam Altman, said employees would have supported the board. But none of that happened, and so the employees got to choose between a charismatic man with a impressively quickly put together plan, and a group of headless chickens running in circles.
- hahnchen 3y agoImportant to know: > Anna Makanju, the company’s vice president of global affairs ... added that it will retain its ban on developing weapons
- tartuffe78 3y ago"They are not weapons, they are enhanced tools for war."
- racketcon2089 3y ago"All we did was fulfill a contract for a government agency" is the enterprise tech Nuremberg defense.
- kridsdale1 3y agoIBM 2024.
- FirmwareBurner 3y ago"Tools for special military operations". Nobody declares war anymore.
- thaumasiotes 3y ago> "They are not weapons, they are enhanced tools for war." It's really common for people to make arguments that would become completely incoherent if translated into another language. This is a fun example of one of those. The Chinese word for "weapons" is 武器, literally "war tools". Compare "It would be illegal for soldiers to do that, but these are police, which is fine."
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- karaterobot 3y agoWhere's the binding part of that? In a world where they just remove the language that says they won't work with the military at all, what reassurance should a verbal promise by a VP provide? Assume that the parenthetical "(... for now)" is implied in all such promises.
- qualifiedai 3y ago[flagged]
- padjo 3y agoWorse for who?
- idopmstuff 3y agoThis is the right take. AI on the battlefield is a foregone conclusion, so it behooves us to understand and implement AI earlier, rather than later. That way we can do it in a measured and tested way; the alterative is realizing our lack of AI is causing us to lose a war and accelerating implementation of it as much as possible with less regard for safety.
- scottyah 3y agoBattle AI stuff is already developed in-house or by firms like Palantir. OpenAI's products are more likely to be used on the billions of emails sent daily from people who aren't in full command of the English language or are too lazy to look at man pages. Aka regular LLM usage for normal people.
- dogman144 3y ago“behoove” in a discussion about tech and the military is where worlds collide. The favorite word of mixed-ly educated, immensely powerful senior enlisted. I’ve been told what behooves me many a time but this is the first time that AI has behooved me.
- idopmstuff 3y agoAI wasn't the thing behooving in my post - it's understanding AI that is behooving us. We should be behoven by it!
- halJordan 3y agoI've found that the people who complain about the word behoove are the ones least likely to understand the word's meaning.
- kornhole 3y agoThe ostensible application to prevent veterans from committing suicide indicates they could use it to do the opposite. Simply making an enemy very depressed will disable him by ensuring he loses will to fight or protest.
- Avshalom 3y ago"The opposite" is causing veterans to commit suicide. Which is actually pretty likely considering how things went when the eating disorder hotline replaced humans with an llm.
- kornhole 3y agoI probably did not explain well. Technology is often a double edged sword. If it can be used to prevent someone from committing suicide, it can potentionally be used to encourage someone to commit suicide. OpenAI and DOD said that it would be used for the former, but it could be used to target enemies for the latter.
- scottyah 3y agoIf they want to integrate OpenAI stuff into more Microsoft products, they'll need to make it work with the organization that's probably their biggest customer (if we call the entire DoD one customer).
- racketcon2089 3y agoNothing says "we're concerned about AI risk and harm to human life" quite like partnering with the military-industrial complex. It's even better timing to do this while the Pentagon is providing material and intelligence support to a government whose decisonmakers' public statements are explicit admissions of intent to commit war crimes and also convey genocidal intent. Glad we spent all that time talking about AGI and Roko's Basilisk, those should be top of mind always, never the current actions of the humans in charge at both OpenAI and the US government.
- primitivesuave 3y agoThe CIA probably realizes it doesn't need to fund rebel groups [1] or use local journalists/clergy [2] to instigate a regime change these days - they can just flood a target country's social media with AI-generated propaganda. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93Contra_affair 2. https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/hearings/ciasuseofjournal00unit.pdf https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/hear...
- idopmstuff 3y agoI would wager a whole lot of money that the CIA is very much on top of this one.
- iwontberude 3y agoWorld peace incoming
- xbar 3y agoPhew. I was getting scared that someone would use it to cause instability.
- iknowstuff 3y agoI sure hope so, Russia has 100% been doing it, with multiple documented „botfarms” (more like fake identity verification farms)
- mschuster91 3y agoRussia doesn't need fancy "AI" to do this. Human operators and a few well-designed scripts make botting very easy.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- 3y ago
- renewiltord 3y ago[flagged]
- baron816 3y agoAs a liberal raised during the backlash to the Iraq War, my attitude towards the Military Industrial Complex has really changed in the aftermath of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and China’s seemingly inevitable invasion of Taiwan. Add in the possibility that the US could be dragged into new wars in the Middle East and even possibly South America, and I really don’t think we have the luxury to say “weapons bad, let’s not build any”. Being the policeman of the world absolutely sucks. War absolutely sucks. But one of the best ways to prevent China, Russia, Iran, Venezuela, etc from saying “might make right, let’s take this land and these resources from our neighbors, since no one can stop us” is for the US to say, “no, we will stop you and we have the will and the tools to easily do it.”
- gremlinunderway 3y ago[flagged]
- idopmstuff 3y agoAvoiding doing anything that might antagonize the bad guys isn't a particularly effective strategy for maintaining a stable and peaceful world. The lesson of Poland in WW2 is that when evil dictators get what they want, they don't calmly stop doing bad things.
- pyuser583 3y agoThe alternative to NATO expansion was transferring European defense to the EU. Or having a bunch of EU nations extremely vulnerable to Russian influence. I’m very glad it’s NATO, and not the “EU Supreme Command” defending the Continent. Russia and Ukraine probably are too.
- blibble 3y agoRussia would have loved "EU Supreme Command" instead of NATO the Germans would have happily given Ukraine up (and likely Poland too) if they got a few cents off their gas bill
- woah 3y ago
- quantum_state 3y ago[flagged]
- dang 3y agoRecent and related: OpenAI deletes ban on using ChatGPT for "military and warfare" - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38972735 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38972735 - Jan 2024 (260 comments)
- ptelomere 3y agoGoogle's "don't be evil", removed when it was against profit. Silicon Valley's "We're all family" culture, screw that, company profit first, you're all laid off! Now this. When did "liberal" becomes synonymous with liberally removing/adding a moral value when they no longer works for your profit ? It's not a wonder why half of the country no longer believe in "liberalism".
- autoexec 3y agoI've never really associated Google, Silicon Valley culture, or OpenAI with "liberalism". I'm pretty sure all three have been primarily about making money from the very instant money got involved. It's the same with basically every successful corporation. Anyone with ideals and values beyond "more money at the expense of all else" gets forced out.
- datavirtue 3y agoLiberalism has nothing against making money. The core value is autonomy. Liberty. Freedom.
- krapp 3y agoNeither Silicon Valley nor Google have ever been "liberal." Both have always had deep roots in the military industrial complex. The "liberal" bias of tech is just culture war propaganda.
- adventured 3y agoThe people that work for big tech in SV are overwhelmingly liberal, in nearly all respects. And sometimes they contain contradictions in their belief systems. It doesn't have to be one or the other. In reality people are very frequently a wild mixture ideologically. Just because you work for a defense contractor making cruise missiles, that doesn't mean you aren't / can't be a liberal. It means you're perhaps inconsistent in your values, which is more typical than not with people generally. Our human history is filled with sayings and rules about these things, precisely because of how common hypocrisy, contradiction, irrationality are. Do as I say not as I do. Preaching the golden rule and routinely breaking it. Judging others by what they do and judging yourself by your (good) intentions. Pot calling the kettle black. And on and on and on similarly across all cultures.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y agoGood! I'm tired of all of the SV companies presupposing that government work must be unethical. Even if the work is for weapons, having the largest advantage possible will prevent or shorten wars and save lives. Do you want your sons and daughters to fight a fair fight?
- Aeolun 3y ago> Do you want your sons and daughters to fight a fair fight? I don’t want them to fight at all. But more importantly, I don’t want anyone friend or “foe” to die from faulty AI decisions. I can sort of reconcile some human bomber pilot making a mistake and hitting a family home, but if AI does the same thing it’s just wrong.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago> I don’t want them to fight at all. Me either. > I don’t want anyone friend or “foe” to die from faulty AI decisions. Me either. I'm going to assume they'll do more than 5 minutes of homework on AI
- halJordan 3y agoNobody wants to fight. Like the op said, it's the presupposition that "ofc they're sociopaths, of course they want pain, death, and suffering" You dont have the monopoly on abhorring human suffering. It's been decided US policy since Bush to deter rather than defeat US enemies and as much as you hem and haw about the word enemy, they do consider themselves enemies of the US.
- Aeolun 3y agoOf course they don’t “want” pain, death and suffering, because nobody will admit that to himself. Sometimes the ends just justify the means. Like how it’s fine to kill 100k people in some desert on the other side of the world to potentially prevent a few deaths on your side.
- pyridines 3y agoI'm reminded of the Itchy and Scratchy clip where they each pull out bigger and bigger guns on each other, until finally the earth explodes.
- zaphirplane 3y agoThe pentagon welcomes the return of Sam Altman back to the OpenAI board
- SlightlyLeftPad 3y agoHard to argue at this point. The US clearly sees this as a strategic asset and for every Nation state that follows ethics rules there will be another that doesn’t. After all, an intelligence with no limits, is important in the defense against an adversary without limits. The AI race has begun and I sense nothing but bad things will come of this. Oppenheimer will almost certainly be turning in his grave.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- surfingdino 3y ago> "Fire!" > "I'm unable to help, as I am only a language model and don't have the ability to process and understand that."
- cube00 3y agoIt will "hallucinate" and claim it hit the target successfully when it didn't actually happen.
- kevingadd 3y agoAnd in the event that a human being accidentally attacks a hospital[1], the AI will successfully argue that it didn't happen, as doing so would violate the acceptable use policy. 1: https://www.msf.org/kunduz-hospital-attack-depth https://www.msf.org/kunduz-hospital-attack-depth
- IAmNotACellist 3y agoHaving seen ChatGPT's results when you ask it to solve an ethical puzzle and substitute in various demographics to see how its answer varies (viz. with extreme bias), I'm far more concerned about how its fundamental bias will be woven into systems that develop weapons of war and provide intelligence.
- oefrha 3y agoFundamental bias against the demographics it’s currently biased against seems to be exactly what American military wants. The foundational models are trained on mountains of propaganda and propaganda-inspired content against America’s enemies after all, much more than the other direction.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- huytersd 3y agoGood. I wish Google did this too. The government should have access to the latest and greatest and the best minds in the country. I don’t want our men to die because they didn’t have the best technology.
- karmasimida 3y agoDARPA will find its way one way or another. You can virtue signaling, but there is no reality you can stop them obtaining the technology. Besides your enemy will not wait.
- uoaei 3y agoNo doubt they already have numerous internal initiatives, OpenAI could simply not exist and DARPA would figure it out in a couple years. OpenAI's public offerings are already pretty successfully used by adversaries. It seems like just creating a technology such as this and shooting it out into the world has only created more potential for harm across the board.
- kridsdale1 3y agoGoogle hasn’t managed it and they are far far better staffed and funded than any government or military program.
- cm2012 3y agoThe future of warfare is AI powered drones, zero doubt in my mind. Imagine the micro from Starcraft Go on a real life drone with a gun and bombs.
- gumballindie 3y agoImagine once they hallucinate and attack friendlies. Although if Machine Vision counts as AI then it's already widespread.
- mysterydip 3y agoYou'd never know about it unless it happened to someone you knew (thanks to AI factcheckers burying any story about it), and even then the AI news outlets would gaslight you into questioning if it really did happen.
- cm2012 3y agoI imagine you point it at a location where only enemies are.
- kridsdale1 3y agoERROR: buffer overflow ………. The enemies are inside the house >>>>>>>>>>>
- gumballindie 3y agoAll fun and games until a civilian shows up. Not that we haven't targeted them before but using a system known for its issues is worse. It means we are targeting them by design.
- jayGlow 3y agohuman soldiers already do that, if they can get it down to lower levels than humans it would be an improvement.
- gumballindie 3y ago
- zug_zug 3y agoSlightly off-topic, but it's absolutely shocking to me how quickly OpenAI has managed to do a meteoric PR nosedive. I think within 6 months they've gone from one of the most exciting (yet controversial) non-profits in the world to mistrusted company that it seems most people are rooting against.
- gumballindie 3y agoA reflection of its CEO: experience creating FUD and FOMO, doesn't create much else, dubious ethics.
- corethree 3y agoSam Altman. There was an attempted fix and that fix failed. Evil prevailed because of public misunderstanding and mob mentality. Be real, who else would permit this? Paul Graham fired him from ycombinator. I'm pretty sure if the public didn't support Sam he wouldn't have been reinstated.
- Jackson__ 3y agoI think they failed due to not having the courage to admit why they removed Altman. Their messaging was extremely weak and uncertain, a complete failure to communicate anything of value, until everyone was rallying against them.
- corethree 3y agoSam Altman was more charismatic and his charisma overshadowed their messaging. That's the type of person who becomes leader.. Not people who make good decisions but people who are charismatic. There is no clear marker that a evil person is evil until the crime is committed, but you can know someone is not a good person simply by knowing them and talking to that person. It's clear they knew what kind of person Sam Altman was but they had no clear marker because there is no crime, yet. Sam was fired from ycombinator by Paul Graham. That should be enough evidence something is not right with his character, but his firing was kept private and not publicly advertised out of respect.
- solarpunk 3y agoOpenAI sure doesn't seem to have much commitment to upholding any principles they set for themselves, do they?
- andrewstuart 3y agoI was brought up in a household that was anti military. Only as an adult was I able to form my own opinion. Without a strong military in the past we would certainly not be here today and without a strong military now, who knows what other nation might decide to attack our sovereignty. It's childish to be anti military - it shows you do not understand the interconnectedness of our society - good and bad.
- macintux 3y agoThis is a complex topic: I’m a firm believer that Pax Americana has been good for the world as a whole, but there are also no shortage of terrible crimes, and no small number of people who are worse off (including many members of the military itself). I don’t believe it’s “childish” to have serious concerns about the military.
- FactKnower69 3y agoOperation Condor wasn't very pax for anyone living in Pinochet's Chile, or really anywhere in South or Latin America, but I'm sure your family did just fine.
- kridsdale1 3y agoAmerica has historically been racist. The pax was for the sake of the northern hemisphere.
- amrocha 3y agoI could make literally the opposite argument. Other countries antagonize the US because of its military interventionism. If the US had lower military spending, other countries wouldn't feel the need to be aggressive. It's childish to be pro military. It shows you think arbitrary lines on a map determine who's good or bad.
- scottLobster 3y agoYeah, I'm sure Russia and China would be far less aggressive if the US had lower military spending. What you're suggesting is the geopolitical equivalent of "ignore the bully and they'll get bored and go away". And you call others childish?
- binsquare 3y agoThey haven't changed their principles page yet: https://openai.com/safety-standards https://openai.com/safety-standards ``` Minimize harm We will build safety into our AI tools where possible, and work hard to aggressively reduce harms posed by the misuse or abuse of our AI tools. ``` And I think they can still do that. If they corner every big usecase while they are the top ai models - they get to set the standard and define safety for all upcoming ai use cases. At this point, the ai genie is fully out of the bag. If not openai, it would have been some other company...
- TaylorAlexander 3y agoThis is exactly the reasoning that every entity involved in doing this will say and is what leads to an arms race.
- bigstrat2003 3y ago> If not openai, it would have been some other company... This does not justify anything and never has. I'm not even saying that what OpenAI is doing is bad (I don't think it's inherently bad to work with the military). But if one believes that it is bad, then "well someone was going to do it so it may as well be them" doesn't remotely hold water.
- Frost1x 3y agoDoesn’t it, though? Especially in the context of military, if some potential enemy has no moral qualms using new technology to kill you, doesn’t it mean you’re somewhat forced to provide a defense or die a martyr? This is sort of what happened with nuclear weapons and the race. The strategy developed afterwards was mutually assured destruction but that probably won’t work here.
- bigstrat2003 3y agoNo, it doesn't. If your principles are to mean anything, you can't give them up just because "that other guy doesn't have principles". Either stick by your principles, or don't claim to have them.
- _moof 3y agoPrinciples are great. You can just throw them out the window the second they might mean giving up money!
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- porkbeer 3y agoThe Buterian Jihad approaches ever faster.
- cmrdporcupine 3y agoHunter-seekers, at least.
- newsclues 3y agoChatGPT generated PowerPoints are coming.
- wtcross 3y agoNicolas M. Chaillan, Former U.S. Air Force and Space Force Chief Software Officer (CSO), has been running Ask Sage for a little over a year now. It's a very clever way to benefit from relationships and timing the market on Generative AI buzz. It's not that hard to see where this could go for Ask Sage. https://www.asksage.ai/team https://www.asksage.ai/team
- d--b 3y agoOk so a few weeks ago, virtually every OpenAi employee signed a letter saying “reinstate Altman or I quit”. Is any OpenAi employee wanting to sign a “don’t use OpenAi for war or I quit”? Or was everyone in on betraying all OpenAi’s founding principles from the start?
- ptmcc 3y agoReinstating Altman was all about the money, and so is this.
- SlightlyLeftPad 3y agoDeeply deeply concerning.
- d--b 3y agoI am sure many employees signed the letter out of loyalty. Not sure Altman is being very loyal to them in return.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- QuantumGood 3y agoPersuasion is often a strong skill in managers. Personal motivation absent outside forces has its work cut out for it in corporations.
- rlewczuk 3y agoObserving Altman over OpenAI saga and later I clearly see one thing: duplicity. He was kicked off YC by Graham for unknown reasons, yet after October fiasco I have my suspicions why. Coming back to OpenAI and its beginnings, Altman betrayed all early investors - notably Musk but not only. Betrayed each and every meaningful point of OpenAI original charter, basically making it the oposite of what it originally was - starting exactly at the point when he smelled big money. He even went to Congress, effectively lobbying for limiting competition - especially open source models. Now he betrayed humanitarian values by offering his services for Pentagon - organization that has killed untold millions of people worldwide since WW2 and will happily kill millions more, making a gobs money to MIC in the process (don't tell me about "democracy" and such, it's all bullshit). There is no reason to believe a single word from him, Altman always tells his agenda, nothing else. There will be no 'using AGI for helping humanity' - his corporate buddies will receive profits at the cost of everyone else losing job to AI solutions monopolized by Altman's buddies. There will be no 'distributing profits among people in need', maybe except for some token help just to shut up critics. Altman is a tool for ruling corporate oligarchy. Nothing good will come out of it in my opinion.
- AtomicOrbital 3y agoThe second OpenAI stopped being a not for profit it opened itself up to the highest bidder namely the military industrial complex ... this danger motivated it's corporate structure which explicitly detailed it did not wish to be a pawn of big corporations so sad
- WhackyIdeas 3y agoIt just shows the ‘not for profit’ was just a ploy to sound cool. Really, it should have been ‘only for profit’.
- ChatGTP 3y agoI can guarantee you what Altman will say, are you ready ? We think it’s important the US stays ahead of China and Russia and we believe the benefits will outpace the risks. Ultimately this move will benefit humanity Maybe he’s right, maybe if everyone has killer robots, no he will bother starting war? Who knows? Nobody
- mikrotikker 3y agoThis is the same thinking that like led to the Chinese PLA affiliated scientists developing that 100% death rate brain covid that was reported this week.
- blitzar 3y agoObviously Humanity == USA
- WhackyIdeas 3y agoProven time and time again. The Good Guys(TM)
- anticensor 3y agoMore like, "more than profit".
- 3y ago
- jacquesm 3y agoUtterly predictable. AI will be weaponized and anybody working on it is going to have to live with that knowledge. Consider yourselves part of the MIC from now on, no more bs about doing this for the betterment of humanity. And to add to that: once any party figures out how to do this it is a matter of time before the rest does too, there is no such thing as a secret. The atomic bomb leaked and so will the recipe for AGI. So not only are you working for the MIC of your own country you are also enabling your future enemies.
- esafak 3y agoAt least Ilya's crew was working on alignment (https://openai.com/blog/introducing-superalignment https://openai.com/blog/introducing-superalignment). If only the rank-and-file had been more vocally supportive of that, instead of enthusiastically boarding the Altman train. Look where that train is headed...
- throwup238 3y ago> Look where that train is headed... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metalhead_(Black_Mirror) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metalhead_(Black_Mirror)
- 8note 3y agoWhat's the benefit of a military ai that's more aligned to the military's goals? If you're against ai military, wouldn't you want the alignment to be poor?
- largbae 3y agoAlignment to _what_? Humans aren't aligned without AI, what exactly will AI be aligned to?
- esafak 3y agoAligned to its creator's specifications. It's value neutral, but constraints are a precondition for avoiding pathological behavior.
- TibbityFlanders 3y ago[dead]
- avs733 3y agoI think we are slowly realizing Sam won and we all lost
- WhackyIdeas 3y agoGreat, OpenAI now part of the USA war machine. Great for humanity as a whole I’d say!!!
- readyplayernull 3y agoMeanwhile civilian use of AI will be criminalized: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39009779 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39009779
- tavavex 3y agoI'm confused - what exactly does the Pentagon have to gain from OpenAI's products? Their front-runners are an LLM and an image generator, and I'm not sure what large-scale use case the US Department of Defense can have for either of these.
- kelipso 3y agoOne example would be better communication between soldiers and robots out in the field.
- somenameforme 3y agoThe military thinks they can predict the outcome of battles using tech. They already do extensive sim-gaming stuff for such, and an LLM would fit into these things nicely enough. Whether it actually adds meaningful value matters much less than whether the people paying for it think it can be made to add meaningful value. The other obvious purpose is propaganda, foreign and domestic.
- runlaszlorun 3y ago> The military thinks they can predict the outcome of battles using tech. Ugh. Do they really? Ok, I’m more concerned now. I’m curious where I can find more about the sim-gaming you mentioned. I know there are all kinds of simulators for training as well as wargaming but wasn’t aware of stuff used for modelling outcomes. Then again, I don’t have any involvement with that stuff professionally.
- somenameforme 3y agoThere are multiple vendors, but the big one that I am aware of is called KORA. It was used in planning the counter-attack in Ukraine and you can find numerous references to it, such as in this [1] article. But this and classical war-gaming and very related. The entire point of war-gaming (beyond training) is to try to predict the outcome of a conflict. [1] - https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/06/04/ukraine-nato-training-counteroffensive-47th-brigade/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/06/04/ukraine-nato...
- bogomipz 3y ago>"OpenAI is working with the Pentagon on software projects, including ones related to cybersecurity, the company said Tuesday,..." Can someone say how either of OpenAI's products - GPT and DALLE can be applied to cybersecurity? Or does OpenAI simply have enough extra employee and research headcount when Pentagon money comes calling?
- cryptozeus 3y agoPLTR was doing this anyway, this is not a news. Microsoft has lots of contracts with Gov.
- man4 3y ago[dead]
- azinman2 3y agoEveryone is jumping to conclusions. The DoD is huge and does a lot of boring things. There is a very good chance this won’t be useful for anything physical weapon related, especially when you consider their offerings.
- slim 3y agoThey will use it to supplement their troll factions with robots and cyborgs. For their war on truth
- kridsdale1 3y agoI suspect 99% of what people do in the pentagon is read Microsoft Word documents, and use File New Document and write something else that references the other. LLM for sure can help that process.
- porschelover24 3y ago[dead]
- emptyfile 3y ago[dead]
- unicornmama 3y agoPrinciples always follow business interests.
- seatac76 3y agoThis was always coming, there is no better permanent customer than the DoD. Opens all kinds of revenue doors.
- solarengineer 3y agoAsimov, Daneel, and Giskard would be sad. A positronic brain could be argued to be AI. Neither the first nor the second laws of Robotics would remain unbroken once AI is applied for military purposes.
- monkaiju 3y agoUnsurprising, ghouls...
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- demondemidi 3y agoWOPR
- tim333 3y agoMusk last year: >OpenAI was created as an open source (which is why I named it “Open” AI), non-profit company to serve as a counterweight to Google, but now it has become a closed source, maximum-profit company effectively controlled by Microsoft. Not what I intended at all. It's quite impressive how quickly it's morphed from do good non profit to part of the military industrial complex.
- kridsdale1 3y agoIt’s been pretty fun as a fan of market dynamics to observe the Great Eye of Power catch on with attention and then investment and then securing the Ring for itself.
- wly_cdgr 3y agoLol, most predictable heel turn of all time
- scotty79 3y agoThe arguments here about how US can't allow itself to be outpaced by China eeriely remind me of dialogs from Dr Strangelove where they first discuss "nuclear gap" but after the nuclar weapons are applied and the world mostly ends they smoothly transition about worrying about "mineshaft gap".
- wseqyrku 3y agoYou guys really expected that military would sit on the corner and keep saying killer robots bad?
- fastneutron 3y agoOn reading the headline, everyone’s mind immediately goes to GPT-powered killbots, when in reality this is more likely to RAG its way through mountains of procurement paperwork and other mundane procedural documents.
- d--b 3y agoPersonally I was thinking about mass surveillance. It skips the need for actual people to listen and flag bad content, so allows the military to do it on a much grander scale. I am pretty sure the military already has killbots…
- whamlastxmas 3y agoChatGPT, using the entirety of John Doe's browsing history, texting messages, emails, and purchases, tell me the most embarrassing and shameful parts of his life so that we can blackmail him to provide witness testimony
- berniedurfee 3y agoWho, in the US, has more training data than the NSA? Not saying it’s right, but I could imagine the temptation to get effectively unlimited data into an LLM is too much to resist. Especially given the near certainty that content owners have a strong case for protecting their content from free use.
- hunglee2 3y agoMilitary-Civilian fusion is pretty much how a great deal of US technology was developed. I am not sure why anyone ever had such a problem with it, or whether it was considered something bad
- nojvek 3y agoChina and Russia knows US will use AI for autonomous weapons. If they don't have it, they'll be left behind. Adapt or wither away. Before it was the nuclear cold war. This time, it is the AI cold war. I don't trust Sam Altman or what Open AI says. The employees are in it for the money. The non-profit is a joke. It's usual corporations do what corporations have always been doing.
- lern_too_spel 3y agoIf the problem were China, Russia, and the US, there is no problem. Nuclear stockpiles have been drastically reduced because a limited number of superpowers are willing to sign treaties to avoid bad outcomes for everybody. The problem with this technology is that it's cheap enough for DPRK, Iran, Turkey, etc. to use too. Good luck stopping that with a treaty.
- sidcool 3y agoGenuinely curious. What could a text based LLM do for the military? Generate propaganda?
- thebiglebrewski 3y agoIs this how we get Skynet?
- barfingclouds 3y agoDidn’t they specifically say they weren’t going to be involved with weapons and war?