News

I mean, being a shapeless pile of goo has its benefits. No job, no taxes, just vibin

Although AM wasn't supposed to be AI. It emerged accidentally.

I love you too internet stranger

thanks this made me guffaw

A T-800 tried to kill John Connor. A T-800 also tried to protect John Connor. It's all down to what the people programming it decide it should be aimed at.

Every time we see articles like this, I'd point out that Phalanx CIWS can and does operate in a fully-autonomous mode, without a human in the loop to authorize firing. That's been around since 1980.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phalanx_CIWS

An entirely self-contained unit, the mounting houses the gun, an automated fire-control system and all other major components, enabling it to automatically search for, detect, track, engage, and confirm kills using its computer-controlled radar system. Owing to this self-contained nature, Phalanx is ideal for support ships, which lack integrated targeting systems and generally have limited sensors.

The only inputs required for operation are 440 V AC three-phase electric power at 60 Hz and water (for electronics cooling).

Yeah, you can say that until it's the cops doing exactly that to you and yours... 🤬

The more selective we convince ourselves our weapons are, the more willing we are to use them in conflicts where civilians are put at risk—our use of weapons is constrained by the level of collateral damage we’re willing to take responsibility for, and by distancing ourselves from that responsibility, AI allows us to escalate conflicts until civilians are at even greater risk. It’s the Jevons paradox, with human life instead of gasoline.

Simple, just redefine "combatant" to mean "any male person of roughly adult age". Problem solved, no more non combatant kills /s

They probably give the AI bonus weight for finding a terrorist at a birthday party.

They're using the AI to identify the targets which are then reviewed by a human.

I suppose it was the human intervention that made them consistently mistake unarmed civilians for enemy combatants - what could possibly go wrong with this approach?

I was going to ask who gets charged with the warcrimes when a computer bombs a wedding, but that's not likely to change when the current answer is "nobody" or perhaps "the journalists that reported on it."

Finally, did the biggest AI vendor's primary product inexplicably shit the bed like a week ago? Yes? Oh no...

Screamers is more likely I think

Lol, like the US would pay attention to an international arms treaty.

I always describe the birth and development of AI is like a trailer park trash couple that never finished grade school, highly religious and believe in ghosts and fairies that have a new baby.

We're terrible parents that probably shouldn't have children yet we have one that is growing fast and by the time it is fully mature, it will be way more powerful and capable than we are .... but it will have the morals and ethics that it's parents taught it.

AI vision systems are already better than humans at distinguishing between a gun and a camera or other gun-like-but-not-a-gun object, so I for one am cautiously optimistic about this sort of thing. People need to bear in mind that humans aren't the greatest things to be putting in charge of targeting decisions either.

A week before they patch that out and replace the generals with more AI.