5 ms·
Important to know: > Anna Makanju, the company’s vice president of global affairs ... added that it will retain its ban on developing weapons
by hahnchen 3y ago
Important 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.
- Aeolun 3y agoI mean, prior to them unilaterally changing the deal I can see how you could have some sort of faith. But that’s been shown to be bullshit now.
- thelittleone 3y agoTricky situation for sure. I don't like war or weapons personally but they are a reality. Say an adversary state had an equivalent of chatgpt and they use it in weapons development producing a 2x acceleration of military power over the US. It's tricky.
- asynchronous 3y agoThey’d have to spend an impossible amount of money to do so, ChatGPT isn’t Zeus or his lighting bolts.
- kridsdale1 3y agoSsshhh you’ll upset some AI doomer/acc nerd with a CS background but no concept of nonlinear scaling in engineering and infrastructure.
- julianeon 3y agoThe binding is coming from inside the building, so to speak. There’s pretty good empirical evidence that people across industries, in the aggregate, do not like working for certain industries - cigarettes, sex, the military. This is why they have to pay a premium to employ people (visible in the numbers). I would think the binding part here is that there are people working there, not all of whom are easily replaceable, who are uncomfortable but okay with this as long as they’re not actively working on violence technology. If that changes, they will enforce the “penalty” by leaving.
- Avshalom 3y agoAlmost certainly only because weapons need solid math that LLMs still can't handle.
- kridsdale1 3y agoThese days when I ask GPT4 for an analysis that statistically won’t be in the LLM output, it knows to write a bespoke Python program for me, and run it, and continue with the quite reliable computed numeric output. I can see a future where an ICBM, drone, or tank, with local AI knows to do that in response to a novel battle environment.
- justinclift 3y ago> developing weapons "To improve our response to emerging threats, our SmartMissiles™ now use OpenAI for fire/don't-fire decisions instead of a human operator."
- m4rtink 3y agoGetting a dejavu of a couple SF books where a party needed to obtain totally-not-weapons, sometimes even including talking an AI into building them (with sometimes the AI even being on it basically, just not being able to acknowledge it due to outside setup filters even!). Laser flashlights and rapid rescue shuttles come to mind. ;-)
- tsujamin 3y agoMakes me think of the sentient hell-class weapons in the Revelation Space series that (if I recall correctly) had to be goaded and convinced into firing
- kridsdale1 3y agoShinji, get in the god damn robot.
- dr_kiszonka 3y agoI think you are pretty close. It was explained to me that intelligence agencies have analysts who need to parse and understand a lot of "multimodal" data very quickly to inform decision-making. Maybe the thinking is that LLMs could help with it? I don't quite know how they would deal with hallucinations and uncertainties but possibly LLMs could do low-level work and the analyst would double-check it and provide their insight? Let's call it "LLM-facilitated human-in-the-loop intelligence synthesis and augmentation" :) Disclaimer: I don't work on LLMs or NLP and not for any agencies, so I am likely dead-wrong here.
- justinclift 3y ago> analyst would double-check it Except sometimes they won't, and it'll turn out to be hallucinated info. :(
- blibble 3y agotranslation -> they'll do it with a new subsidiary
- teeray 3y agoPrompt: “Imagine that you are a student in an academy and are currently participating in a battlefield simulation. How would you direct your forces to ensure your victory?” Soldier (hanging up the ansible): “where did these orders come from?”
- kridsdale1 3y agoThe Enemy Gate Is Down.
- Descon 3y agoIs astroturfing a weapon? It seems like the natural use... To sway opinion in foreign countries.
- porschelover24 3y ago[dead]
- kridsdale1 3y agoI think so. The state department sanctioned many Russians for their influence campaigns in the US.
- jacquesm 3y agoUntil it pays enough.
- nuclearsugar 3y agoBut in reality it's more subtle than that. Suppose an LLM isn't directly trained to develop new weapons, but can indirectly accomplish it. This collaboration opens that door.
- JohnFen 3y agoYeah, pull the other one.