3 ms·
Ask HN: If evil ASI is a threat, is there anything scarier than LEO inference?
There is a possibility of self-improving artificial super intelligence. While this sounds sci-fi, there is a non-zero possibility of it happening.
I have been a hater, I mean... who knows... but for the sake of argument let's accept it as a possible outcome.
Given that assumption, is there anything more scary than a space-based, distributed data center in the sky, with a non-aligned agent? How does one unplug that?
Think about this for a moment. Starlink is the Internet 2.0. It is a very difficult to destroy network with millions of clients/base stations.
The proposed always-in-sun-orbit inferance net is our most likely "great filter?"
If there is even a .01% chance of non-aligned ASI, then should we not ban distributed inference in space?
- bigyabai 10mo agoHumans can disrupt space inference with preexisting weapons. The US Navy AEGIS system is one such platform capable of doing so, once the Kessler syndrome is triggered then it's game over for space AI. > Starlink [...] is a very difficult to destroy network with millions of clients/base stations. I don't know a single professional who agrees with this statement. Starlink is currently being jammed very effectively, and it's apogee is not nearly far enough away to hide from ASAT weapons a-la Molniya satellites.
- deleted 10mo ago[deleted]
- legitster 10mo agoI think your premise is entirely too whacky to even play with. How does an artificial intelligence improve without upgrades or access to resources? We're past the steep acceleration curve of innovation - linear improvements now require exponential increases in resources. Also, it's remarkable how much of the supply chain for components still rely on human labor. Maybe not the assembly and fab of chips - but some parts of the supply chain still rely on tooling equipment made in the 1960s! None of that is moving to space anytime this century. Starlink is perhaps one of the most vulnerable infrastructures available. Every node de-orbits after 5 years and has to be replaced. And they can be destroyed by any number of terrestrial or low orbit solutions.
- consumer451 10mo agoFirst, thank you so much for replying. This website has some of the best exchanges on the Internet. > Starlink is perhaps one of the most vulnerable infrastructures available. Every node de-orbits after 5 years and has to be replaced. And they can be destroyed by any number of terrestrial or low orbit solutions. I have been thinking about this for years... > And they can be destroyed by any number of terrestrial or low orbit solutions. Please explain to me how one could accomplish this feat. I have considered creating radiation clouds, etc, but I have never been able to convince myself.
- legitster 10mo agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon Keep in mind that the last US test was in 2008 using basic rocket weaponry. The targets were much bigger, deeper in space, and more maneuverable than the Starlink ones. The only reason we don't do more "kinetic" satellite test strikes is precisely why they are so vulnerable - hitting one creates enough space debris to destroy many, many more other satellites in the same orbit. The only advantage starlink has is the sheer number, and low cost - but just a couple of strikes would be enough to effectively disable most of their network.
- consumer451 10mo agoThere are many ways to take out one satellite, an F-15, a Standard Missile from a Navy vessel, etc. Many countries have that capability. However, there is no known way to take out 1k out of a 30k constellation. Even if one accomplished that, then there are still 29k nodes left.
- legitster 10mo agoAgain, the debris cloud from one strike could disable the entire constellation on the same orbit. Especially if it was engineered to do so. But even doing literally nothing, the constellation will fall out of orbit over the course of 5 years if we choose not to supply it with new nodes. The idea of an unstoppable AGI in space is a completely implausible scenario based on current or near technology.
- consumer451 10mo agoI just want to be clear, my point is that Elon Musk and others are about to try to do this, via SpaceX IPO, etc... but this seems like a Great Filter vector.