3 ms·

And maybe don't allow the military to use your AI WHEN YOU CAN'T TELL WHETHER IT WAS INVOLVED IN THE KILLING OF HUNDREDS OF SCHOOL CHILDREN

yoavm 2mo ago
[flagged]
- tsimionescu 2mo ago
  There is a huge difference between your product being used for basic military operations like taking notes or getting from A to B, and your products suggesting military operations that kill hundreds of schoolchildren, an obvious and horrific war crime.
  - yoavm 2mo ago
    It's a mistake. If it was done by an auto-correct mechanism, would we still say "maybe don't sell your word processor to the army if you can't vouch for its auto-correct system!!!"? Besides, "taking notes" can literally be listing targets, and "getting from A to B" can be the road to killing them.
    - 7373737373 2mo ago
      How intelligent and autonomous does a murderbot have to become before you stop absolving its creator and seller from any responsibility?
      - yoavm 2mo ago
        LLM are not murderbots simply because its a very niche use case. They provide some kind of general intelligence, that many of us use daily to vibe code HTML. If the fact that LLMs are also sometimes used to automate killing then humans should be considered murderbots as well, since few of us engage in the activity of killing (and are autonomous & intelligent). Send the blame to our "creator" then?
        7373737373 2mo ago
        You didn't answer my question
        yoavm 2mo ago
        Sorry of it wasn't clear. I put the blame on the creator/seller of any murderbot, regardless of its autonomous or intelligence levels. I disagree that what were talking about, Claude, is a murderbot or anything close to it.
      - q8zd3 2mo ago
        LLM providers get a free pass for anything these days, unfortunately
    - digdugdirk 2mo ago
      If the US military purchased camera guided smart munitions with a miscalibrated camera, such that it ignored adult targets and instead specifically targeted children, would that also be a simple mistake per your argument?
      - yoavm 2mo ago
        If one camera out of thousands has this issue, then yes it's a mistake. If the army doesn't notice it isn't working well after shooting the first child, I'd be learning more towards blaming the army.
    - tsimionescu 2mo ago
      Again, a product that facilitates the taking of notes, even notes that entail the killing of human beings, is fundamentally different from a product that exists to suggest which human beings to kill (or at least which places to destroy, regardless of whether human beings happen to be there or not). If MS Word had some kind of systematic bias that made it likely to corrupt the notes taken in it such that they tend to be more bloody battle plans, then that would indeed lead to some responsibility on the MS engineer's part for any mistakes that result from this bug. Similarly for Ford engineers if their vehicles had some bug that made them more likely to lead soldiers riding in them to the wrong destination. If your system is designed to help choose targets, and it chooses the wrong target, especially with such tragic consequences, then your system is likely not fit for purpose and you should be held responsible for selling it to the army. And that is assuming it didn't actually have some bias + misalignment problem where it intentionally tried to kill children, and selected this school specifically because it gave some plausible deniability. For all we know, it's even possible that some bias like this was known about inside Amthropic and hidden from the public - unless an external investigation is made, that can't be ruled out.
- 7373737373 2mo ago
  Thou shalt not kill, that's all there is to it really If you provide tools that help an organization kill easier, and possibly lazily rely on your inaccurate tools' judgment, and you do not care about the outcomes of these tools' uses, that's on your soul, too. Yes, causality and attribution are hard sometimes, but it may have been that without it, hundreds of humans would be alive right now, and he doesn't even know. Maybe he should talk to the kids' parents about what alignment means.
  - yoavm 2mo ago
    Ah, I didn't realize we're having a religous discussion. If all there is to it is "thou shalt not kill" then I guess that according to your POV he shouldn't have sold to the military even if the system was only suggesting "valid" targets.
perpetualpear 2mo ago
I might've been bamboozled, but I recal that happening due to outdated satelite images, not a mistake of the AI. Thus, a human would've likely made the same mistake.
- mrhottakes 2mo ago
  > Thus, a human would've likely made the same mistake. The AI industry and all of its sycophants in the Trump administration are working very hard to make you believe this.
noahbp 2mo ago
They had a near-monopoly on AI-usage by the US military, then had a very public fallout because they refused to allow it to be used for autonomous weapons and mass-surveillance which their main competitor (OpenAI) publicly undermined by immediately signing an unlimited-use agreement, and now they also get flack for this incident they had no control over, because the US military decided to smear them after this fallout?
- malfist 2mo ago
  Should we not judge them by their actions? They selected the children's school as a target. Anything else is irrelevant
q8zd3 2mo ago
context?
- 7373737373 2mo ago
  https://www.reuters.com/world/us-says-it-wouldnt-deliberately-target-school-after-iran-said-over-160-killed-2026-03-02/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us-says-it-wouldnt-deliberatel... https://www.forbes.com/sites/antoniopequenoiv/2026/06/10/anthropic-ceo-we-dont-know-exactly-how-claude-ai-was-used-in-iran-school-strike/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/antoniopequenoiv/2026/06/10/ant... https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/03/04/anthropic-ai-iran-campaign/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/03/04/anthrop...

yoavm 2mo ago

[flagged]

tsimionescu 2mo ago
There is a huge difference between your product being used for basic military operations like taking notes or getting from A to B, and your products suggesting military operations that kill hundreds of schoolchildren, an obvious and horrific war crime.
- yoavm 2mo ago
  It's a mistake. If it was done by an auto-correct mechanism, would we still say "maybe don't sell your word processor to the army if you can't vouch for its auto-correct system!!!"? Besides, "taking notes" can literally be listing targets, and "getting from A to B" can be the road to killing them.
  - 7373737373 2mo ago
    How intelligent and autonomous does a murderbot have to become before you stop absolving its creator and seller from any responsibility?
    - yoavm 2mo ago
      LLM are not murderbots simply because its a very niche use case. They provide some kind of general intelligence, that many of us use daily to vibe code HTML. If the fact that LLMs are also sometimes used to automate killing then humans should be considered murderbots as well, since few of us engage in the activity of killing (and are autonomous & intelligent). Send the blame to our "creator" then?
      - 7373737373 2mo ago
        You didn't answer my question
        yoavm 2mo ago
        Sorry of it wasn't clear. I put the blame on the creator/seller of any murderbot, regardless of its autonomous or intelligence levels. I disagree that what were talking about, Claude, is a murderbot or anything close to it.
    - q8zd3 2mo ago
      LLM providers get a free pass for anything these days, unfortunately
  - digdugdirk 2mo ago
    If the US military purchased camera guided smart munitions with a miscalibrated camera, such that it ignored adult targets and instead specifically targeted children, would that also be a simple mistake per your argument?
    - yoavm 2mo ago
      If one camera out of thousands has this issue, then yes it's a mistake. If the army doesn't notice it isn't working well after shooting the first child, I'd be learning more towards blaming the army.
  - tsimionescu 2mo ago
    Again, a product that facilitates the taking of notes, even notes that entail the killing of human beings, is fundamentally different from a product that exists to suggest which human beings to kill (or at least which places to destroy, regardless of whether human beings happen to be there or not). If MS Word had some kind of systematic bias that made it likely to corrupt the notes taken in it such that they tend to be more bloody battle plans, then that would indeed lead to some responsibility on the MS engineer's part for any mistakes that result from this bug. Similarly for Ford engineers if their vehicles had some bug that made them more likely to lead soldiers riding in them to the wrong destination. If your system is designed to help choose targets, and it chooses the wrong target, especially with such tragic consequences, then your system is likely not fit for purpose and you should be held responsible for selling it to the army. And that is assuming it didn't actually have some bias + misalignment problem where it intentionally tried to kill children, and selected this school specifically because it gave some plausible deniability. For all we know, it's even possible that some bias like this was known about inside Amthropic and hidden from the public - unless an external investigation is made, that can't be ruled out.
7373737373 2mo ago
Thou shalt not kill, that's all there is to it really If you provide tools that help an organization kill easier, and possibly lazily rely on your inaccurate tools' judgment, and you do not care about the outcomes of these tools' uses, that's on your soul, too. Yes, causality and attribution are hard sometimes, but it may have been that without it, hundreds of humans would be alive right now, and he doesn't even know. Maybe he should talk to the kids' parents about what alignment means.
- yoavm 2mo ago
  Ah, I didn't realize we're having a religous discussion. If all there is to it is "thou shalt not kill" then I guess that according to your POV he shouldn't have sold to the military even if the system was only suggesting "valid" targets.

perpetualpear 2mo ago

I might've been bamboozled, but I recal that happening due to outdated satelite images, not a mistake of the AI. Thus, a human would've likely made the same mistake.

mrhottakes 2mo ago
> Thus, a human would've likely made the same mistake. The AI industry and all of its sycophants in the Trump administration are working very hard to make you believe this.

noahbp 2mo ago

They had a near-monopoly on AI-usage by the US military, then had a very public fallout because they refused to allow it to be used for autonomous weapons and mass-surveillance which their main competitor (OpenAI) publicly undermined by immediately signing an unlimited-use agreement, and now they also get flack for this incident they had no control over, because the US military decided to smear them after this fallout?

malfist 2mo ago
Should we not judge them by their actions? They selected the children's school as a target. Anything else is irrelevant

q8zd3 2mo ago

context?

7373737373 2mo ago
https://www.reuters.com/world/us-says-it-wouldnt-deliberately-target-school-after-iran-said-over-160-killed-2026-03-02/ https://www.reuters.com/world/us-says-it-wouldnt-deliberatel... https://www.forbes.com/sites/antoniopequenoiv/2026/06/10/anthropic-ceo-we-dont-know-exactly-how-claude-ai-was-used-in-iran-school-strike/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/antoniopequenoiv/2026/06/10/ant... https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/03/04/anthropic-ai-iran-campaign/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/03/04/anthrop...