2 ms·

Few follow up points: 1. The knowledge necessary to create chemical weapons is chemistry. Are you sure there are not many positive uses of chemistry? 2. Milit

Few follow up points: 1. The knowledge necessary to create chemical weapons is chemistry. Are you sure there are not many positive uses of chemistry? 2. Military drones controlled by humans that can also be controlled by AI also need to go in order for this proposed ban to be effective. 3. The scale of the research matters. Yes you may have some groups who choose to ignore the treaty and develop autonomous weapons, but you can monitor for large scale stockpiling of such weapons and counter against their use. What we don't want is for these weapons to be easy to come by in large enough quantities to pose a widespread security risk. We'll never eliminate the development completely, but we can make it a smaller problem than widespread use could be.

BinaryIdiot 11y ago
1. Chemistry yes but the specific area of chemistry I'm not sure how many positive knowledge comes out of it. Granted there will be some but I don't think it's even close to being comparable to AI research. Chemical weapons need to, as efficiently as possible, break down areas of the body so I'm not sure a ton of positive applications come out of that (but again I'm sure at least some would). 2. Yeah but considering how many of those exist and how easy it is to even weaponize consumer drones I don't think any type of ban is even possible here even if it was universally agreed upon as a net positive action. 3. I'm not sure how we could target anyone working on this though. AI is going to be largely in software. Granted we don't understand how a really good AI will look and it's possible it'll need more specialized hardware to better support a neural net but I can't imagine that's going to be large enough to be able to track or even see even if it was necessary. Developing software that can optionally control machines is just not possible to monitor and counter. Someone in their home may end up creating the most advanced AI and we'd have no idea until it's employed somewhere.

BinaryIdiot 11y ago

1. Chemistry yes but the specific area of chemistry I'm not sure how many positive knowledge comes out of it. Granted there will be some but I don't think it's even close to being comparable to AI research. Chemical weapons need to, as efficiently as possible, break down areas of the body so I'm not sure a ton of positive applications come out of that (but again I'm sure at least some would). 2. Yeah but considering how many of those exist and how easy it is to even weaponize consumer drones I don't think any type of ban is even possible here even if it was universally agreed upon as a net positive action. 3. I'm not sure how we could target anyone working on this though. AI is going to be largely in software. Granted we don't understand how a really good AI will look and it's possible it'll need more specialized hardware to better support a neural net but I can't imagine that's going to be large enough to be able to track or even see even if it was necessary. Developing software that can optionally control machines is just not possible to monitor and counter. Someone in their home may end up creating the most advanced AI and we'd have no idea until it's employed somewhere.