48 ms·

Don't get distracted. This technology is going to be used to kill people.

tinfoilhatter 7mo ago
Probably already is. I'm confident that whatever us plebs get access to is less capable than what nation states do.
mothballed 7mo ago
Lol the CEO of Palantir already bragged that occasionally his enemies have to be killed.[] It's honestly wild watching companies with common investors, and when you dig into the details, their executives are bragging about killing their enemies. And then people argue that when surveillance is used to systematically individually stalk all of us it's magically not illegal, even though if you did that to a bunch of your ex girlfriends tracking all their movements to work and the grocery store and argued 'muh free speech to record' your ass would be in jail lickity split because there is a big difference between recording the public and stalking people while conspiring with people who are literally bragging about the killing of their enemies. [] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5gC_fParbY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5gC_fParbY
- delfinom 7mo ago
  CEO of Palantir looks like he does lines of coke in the bathroom before speaking. I don't know if anything that cokehead says can be taken seriously or true.
  - mothballed 7mo ago
    The year of that earnings call the stock went up 5x. He could have walked up naked and given an hallucinogenic induced speech and his investors would have lapped it up. This was a moment where a CEO was able to actually speak his mind without reproach. A rare glimpse where you learn what these surveillance companies are actually thinking.
- fc417fc802 7mo ago
  It's a matter of scale. If you only do it to one or a few ex girlfriends you'll get thrown in jail. As long as you do it to enough of them simultaneously everything is okay.
BigTTYGothGF 7mo ago
"going to be"?
gilesvangruisen 7mo ago
Always has been! Lots of math/ML/regressions already being used to make kill decisions: homing missiles, kamikaze drones, naval defense/sentries. All use a combination of computer vision, signal classification, predictive tracking. LLMs just the latest solved math problem.
- jvanderbot 7mo ago
  Wrote my PhD thesis on tracking invasive fish. Not only was what we built essentially, a scout-to-kill drone, it was also built on a ton of tracking literature which was basically built to track things to kill. No matter how far back you go, the military has always been a huge player (supply or demand side) in R&D.
deleted 7mo ago
[deleted]
IncreasePosts 7mo ago
Is that a good or a bad thing?
- ryanisnan 7mo ago
  Are you serious? When you lower the cost of killing, nobody wins.
  - decremental 7mo ago
    [dead]
  - neoromantique 7mo ago
    You don't lower the cost of killing by improved targeting, you lower it by thugs shooting people in broad daylight with no consequences. I understand the argument that moving the decision making power to a black box would clear conscience of the operator, yadda yadda yadda, but newsflash, price of human life is falling so quick, that I think we're far beyond the point where it matters.
    - Insanity 7mo ago
      Less severe than killing, you’re essentially describing the “broken windows” theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory
  - hedora 7mo ago
    It usually boils down to who controls the technology, not the absolute cost. Centralized AI killbots with no safety controls are almost certainly bad. Individually owned and controlled militias of defensive (and decentralized) AI killbots? Unclear.
    - NoGravitas 7mo ago
      The film 'Slaughterbots' presents a scenario which could be either of those, but is implied to be the latter.
josefritzishere 7mo ago
Not just people ...it will be used to kill Americans.

Probably already is. I'm confident that whatever us plebs get access to is less capable than what nation states do.

Lol the CEO of Palantir already bragged that occasionally his enemies have to be killed.[] It's honestly wild watching companies with common investors, and when you dig into the details, their executives are bragging about killing their enemies. And then people argue that when surveillance is used to systematically individually stalk all of us it's magically not illegal, even though if you did that to a bunch of your ex girlfriends tracking all their movements to work and the grocery store and argued 'muh free speech to record' your ass would be in jail lickity split because there is a big difference between recording the public and stalking people while conspiring with people who are literally bragging about the killing of their enemies. [] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5gC_fParbY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5gC_fParbY

delfinom 7mo ago
CEO of Palantir looks like he does lines of coke in the bathroom before speaking. I don't know if anything that cokehead says can be taken seriously or true.
- mothballed 7mo ago
  The year of that earnings call the stock went up 5x. He could have walked up naked and given an hallucinogenic induced speech and his investors would have lapped it up. This was a moment where a CEO was able to actually speak his mind without reproach. A rare glimpse where you learn what these surveillance companies are actually thinking.
fc417fc802 7mo ago
It's a matter of scale. If you only do it to one or a few ex girlfriends you'll get thrown in jail. As long as you do it to enough of them simultaneously everything is okay.

BigTTYGothGF 7mo ago

"going to be"?

gilesvangruisen 7mo ago

Always has been! Lots of math/ML/regressions already being used to make kill decisions: homing missiles, kamikaze drones, naval defense/sentries. All use a combination of computer vision, signal classification, predictive tracking. LLMs just the latest solved math problem.

jvanderbot 7mo ago
Wrote my PhD thesis on tracking invasive fish. Not only was what we built essentially, a scout-to-kill drone, it was also built on a ton of tracking literature which was basically built to track things to kill. No matter how far back you go, the military has always been a huge player (supply or demand side) in R&D.

deleted 7mo ago

[deleted]

IncreasePosts 7mo ago

Is that a good or a bad thing?

ryanisnan 7mo ago
Are you serious? When you lower the cost of killing, nobody wins.
- decremental 7mo ago
  [dead]
- neoromantique 7mo ago
  You don't lower the cost of killing by improved targeting, you lower it by thugs shooting people in broad daylight with no consequences. I understand the argument that moving the decision making power to a black box would clear conscience of the operator, yadda yadda yadda, but newsflash, price of human life is falling so quick, that I think we're far beyond the point where it matters.
  - Insanity 7mo ago
    Less severe than killing, you’re essentially describing the “broken windows” theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory
- hedora 7mo ago
  It usually boils down to who controls the technology, not the absolute cost. Centralized AI killbots with no safety controls are almost certainly bad. Individually owned and controlled militias of defensive (and decentralized) AI killbots? Unclear.
  - NoGravitas 7mo ago
    The film 'Slaughterbots' presents a scenario which could be either of those, but is implied to be the latter.

josefritzishere 7mo ago

Not just people ...it will be used to kill Americans.