2 ms·
You may as well do the first two if you aren't going to do the latter. Fighting an opponent using AI is like fighting a modern army with spears because you thin
by run4yourlives2 11y ago
You may as well do the first two if you aren't going to do the latter. Fighting an opponent using AI is like fighting a modern army with spears because you think guns are evil.
This is such a technology leap it's not even funny. I appreciate the signatories' intent here and applaud them for higher level thinking but banning offensive AI first strike or counter strike ability is not going to happen because it puts people that ignore said ban far ahead of you in the ability to deal death department.
The US isn't going to dismantle it's nuclear arms, and neither is any other major power. Same story here, only these weapons are even scarier because of the fact that they are much more flexible.
It's nuclear arms strength without all that gooey radiation mess. AI could do everything from surgical strikes to full on massed combat without losing a countryman and dominating other nations on the battlefield. Nobody is going to get caught flat footed on that one.
- ethanbond 11y agoNo it's more like having guns that are mounted around your village, but not allowing guns that can be mobilized outwardly. For a world trying to be more civilized, that's a noble and defensible position.
- ZenoArrow 11y ago> "The US isn't going to dismantle it's nuclear arms, and neither is any other major power." It can be done. It happened in South Africa. It was also the subject of considerable debate in the last UK election. We don't have to keep them, as many people recognise they're very expensive for something we have no need for.