4 ms·

Not asking, and pressing on, “How?” in most of these is journalistic malpractice. “Does it involve creation of technology that doesn’t exist now?” “Does it in

Not asking, and pressing on, “How?” in most of these is journalistic malpractice. “Does it involve creation of technology that doesn’t exist now?” “Does it involve physically impossible nanotech?” “Does it involve assuming the personal safety of every person with a any degree of control over it?”

thinkingtoilet 2y ago
AI is already killing innocent people in war. All it takes is for AI to launch the wrong missile once.
- talldayo 2y ago
  In a traditional sense (not like Lavander), AI is applied in combat in extremely specific situations where it is almost impossible to mess-up. Computer-vision bombs have to corroborate their target with GPS or INS information, and mostly serve to get a solid TV lock on a target; there is no LLM to jailbreak here. Cruise missiles are a dangerous asset, but that's the case with or without AI; we design these dangerous weapons specifically so they can't be overriden or controlled by third-parties, AI included. In theory, you're right. If an LLM was given complete control over ballistic missiles, there is a nonzero chance that something could go horribly wrong. But this is where we take two steps back and realize that no rational country will give AI complete control over their weapons. It would be an extremely human-based design failure to hand over control of nuclear weapons to a statistics model designed to be wrong.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > this is where we take two steps back and realize that no rational country will give AI complete control over their weapons And to the extent they do, it’s replacing a system which otherwise wasn’t particularly concerning itself with civilian casualties on the other side.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- mdp2021 2y ago
  That is not the algorithm or the black-box: that is using it loosely, intentionally, by humans. It is another available piece of imposing power that can be used irresponsibly.

thinkingtoilet 2y ago

AI is already killing innocent people in war. All it takes is for AI to launch the wrong missile once.

talldayo 2y ago
In a traditional sense (not like Lavander), AI is applied in combat in extremely specific situations where it is almost impossible to mess-up. Computer-vision bombs have to corroborate their target with GPS or INS information, and mostly serve to get a solid TV lock on a target; there is no LLM to jailbreak here. Cruise missiles are a dangerous asset, but that's the case with or without AI; we design these dangerous weapons specifically so they can't be overriden or controlled by third-parties, AI included. In theory, you're right. If an LLM was given complete control over ballistic missiles, there is a nonzero chance that something could go horribly wrong. But this is where we take two steps back and realize that no rational country will give AI complete control over their weapons. It would be an extremely human-based design failure to hand over control of nuclear weapons to a statistics model designed to be wrong.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > this is where we take two steps back and realize that no rational country will give AI complete control over their weapons And to the extent they do, it’s replacing a system which otherwise wasn’t particularly concerning itself with civilian casualties on the other side.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
mdp2021 2y ago
That is not the algorithm or the black-box: that is using it loosely, intentionally, by humans. It is another available piece of imposing power that can be used irresponsibly.