3 ms·

americans unironically trying to justify air strikes using the phrase "weapon of mass destruction" in 2024 -- to describe a fucking computer program, no less --

americans unironically trying to justify air strikes using the phrase "weapon of mass destruction" in 2024 -- to describe a fucking computer program, no less -- is so far beyond parody wonder if this guy considers stuxnet a wmd

beeflet 2y ago
I think people should generally be allowed to own weapons and general purpose computers, I don't think anyone has a right to build a doomsday device in their garage. If it is impossible to reconcile these, then freedom will be impossible. The only long-term solution is to develop "anti-doomsday" technology. If you have a massive warehouse to train an AI that, IDK folds proteins to develop a bioweapon or something, then you should not expect everyone else to sit on their hands while you plan to hold the entire world hostage. Stuxnet was a program that targeted specifically SCADA controllers used in uranium enrichment facilities. It is not a doomsday device, it is a targeted counter-doomsday device. And while the USA has an imperfect track record with respect to "WMD"s/Proliferation, stuxnet is something that I approve of as an american.
- nirav72 2y ago
  >folds proteins to develop a bioweapon or something That has been possible for a long time. The only thing needed was raw compute power to simulate it. Not sure how AI research suddenly makes itself worthy of a airstrike based on clearly unproven scenarios. What makes you think a rogue nation will sink ridiculous amounts of money building the power , cooling infrastructure, acquiring the necessary computing hardware and knowledge to build an hypothetical tool that will aid them in making a WMD - when they could just create tanks of sarin gas or anthrax for a fraction of the cost plus manpower that could be delivered to the target in multiple ways? A rogue nation having the capability to build AI datacenters, will also have the ability to do simple risk/benefit analysis.

beeflet 2y ago

I think people should generally be allowed to own weapons and general purpose computers, I don't think anyone has a right to build a doomsday device in their garage. If it is impossible to reconcile these, then freedom will be impossible. The only long-term solution is to develop "anti-doomsday" technology. If you have a massive warehouse to train an AI that, IDK folds proteins to develop a bioweapon or something, then you should not expect everyone else to sit on their hands while you plan to hold the entire world hostage. Stuxnet was a program that targeted specifically SCADA controllers used in uranium enrichment facilities. It is not a doomsday device, it is a targeted counter-doomsday device. And while the USA has an imperfect track record with respect to "WMD"s/Proliferation, stuxnet is something that I approve of as an american.

nirav72 2y ago
>folds proteins to develop a bioweapon or something That has been possible for a long time. The only thing needed was raw compute power to simulate it. Not sure how AI research suddenly makes itself worthy of a airstrike based on clearly unproven scenarios. What makes you think a rogue nation will sink ridiculous amounts of money building the power , cooling infrastructure, acquiring the necessary computing hardware and knowledge to build an hypothetical tool that will aid them in making a WMD - when they could just create tanks of sarin gas or anthrax for a fraction of the cost plus manpower that could be delivered to the target in multiple ways? A rogue nation having the capability to build AI datacenters, will also have the ability to do simple risk/benefit analysis.