4 ms·

> their tech is used to bomb children If you're talking about the school in Iran, that wasn't OpenAI. That was a Palantir system that pre-dates OAI by a few

by jedberg 6mo ago

> their tech is used to bomb children If you're talking about the school in Iran, that wasn't OpenAI. That was a Palantir system that pre-dates OAI by a few years, and was due to a bad entry in a spreadsheet, that showed the building as military housing. Which it was a few years ago. 180 people lost their lives because of bad data in spreadsheet, but not AI.

Hikikomori 6mo ago
Palantir was using anthropic and its use is being replaced by openai.
- jedberg 6mo ago
  Yes but not for the system that decided to bomb a school. That was a Palanter in house system.
  - Hikikomori 6mo ago
    Afaik the palantir system utilized ai.
    - jedberg 6mo ago
      Yes, their own in house AI. That system doesn't use Anthropic or OpenAI.
steinvakt2 6mo ago
Many years ago. Not "a few years ago". Also you could make the sentence that 180 people lost their lives because of an evil war, of which USA and Israel are the aggressors. And we definitely don't talk enough about that part.
hnbad 6mo ago
180 children lost their lives because of decisions by people in the US military (and ultimately the US government / the POTUS). Let's not fall into the trap of adopting narratives created to waive accountability. The spreadsheet didn't launch a missile, the spreadsheet didn't authorize the strike and the spreadsheet didn't select the target. Not to mention that "outdated spreadsheet" is also a hilariously anachronistic excuse for a war crime if you consider what kind of satellite technology the US has publicly acknowledged to have access to, let alone what kind of technology it is likely to have access to. The difference between intentional premeditated murder and reckless endangerment resulting in a killing is not guilt and innocence but merely the severity and nature of a crime. Both demonstrate a callous disregard for the sanctity of human life, one just specifically seeks to extinguish it, the other merely accepts death and suffering as an acceptable outcome.
- inemesitaffia 6mo ago
  Please talk to your criminal defense lawyer. This is nonsense.

by jedberg 6mo ago

Hikikomori 6mo ago

Palantir was using anthropic and its use is being replaced by openai.

jedberg 6mo ago
Yes but not for the system that decided to bomb a school. That was a Palanter in house system.
- Hikikomori 6mo ago
  Afaik the palantir system utilized ai.
  - jedberg 6mo ago
    Yes, their own in house AI. That system doesn't use Anthropic or OpenAI.

steinvakt2 6mo ago

Many years ago. Not "a few years ago". Also you could make the sentence that 180 people lost their lives because of an evil war, of which USA and Israel are the aggressors. And we definitely don't talk enough about that part.

hnbad 6mo ago

180 children lost their lives because of decisions by people in the US military (and ultimately the US government / the POTUS). Let's not fall into the trap of adopting narratives created to waive accountability. The spreadsheet didn't launch a missile, the spreadsheet didn't authorize the strike and the spreadsheet didn't select the target. Not to mention that "outdated spreadsheet" is also a hilariously anachronistic excuse for a war crime if you consider what kind of satellite technology the US has publicly acknowledged to have access to, let alone what kind of technology it is likely to have access to. The difference between intentional premeditated murder and reckless endangerment resulting in a killing is not guilt and innocence but merely the severity and nature of a crime. Both demonstrate a callous disregard for the sanctity of human life, one just specifically seeks to extinguish it, the other merely accepts death and suffering as an acceptable outcome.

inemesitaffia 6mo ago
Please talk to your criminal defense lawyer. This is nonsense.