6 ms·

Famous last words. As an AI practitioner, I want us invest in research to manipulate other AI military systems but not use AI ourselves. Take a page from the

by ljd 5y ago

Famous last words. As an AI practitioner, I want us invest in research to manipulate other AI military systems but not use AI ourselves. Take a page from the HFT book.

tolbish 5y ago
I am curious where you would draw the line between "AI military systems" and existing systems in use such as Iron Dome and other algorithm-assisted weapons.
- eternalban 5y ago
  Two obvious dimensions are: - agency: the machine makes decisions on its own. - defensive vs offensive action
  - Sebb767 5y ago
    > - defensive vs offensive action So if Iron dome launches a rocket in defense it's okay, but that rocket mustn't use AI to find its target? I see your general point, but that's going to be a line that's very hard to draw.
  - tolbish 5y ago
    Perhaps I'm missing something, but that first dimension seems far from obvious. To continue my Iron Dome example, isn't the system making decisions on its own when intercepting anything it classifies as an incoming ballistic threats?
    - eternalban 5y ago
      These are obvious dimensions that need to be considered. Of course there can be discussion as to boundaries drawn in that (here 2-d) space as to 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable'. There may be other dimensions as well, such as 'decision making input sources', etc. As to your specific example, while system x may have 'full agency (autonomous, willful)', if it is purely 'defensive' in nature, it may indeed fall within acceptable zone.
      - tolbish 5y ago
        And as for completely offensive weapons controlled by humans? Your metric seems arbitrary. Why (only) two dimensions?
  - Dah00n 5y ago
    Well, you already watered it down to be a worthless principle when "AI bad" became "AI sometimes bad". OP said "not use AI". Using AI for example in missiles for defence is an offensive weapon as after the defense by the AI you are stronger than without it and you cannot take out missiles without attacking. The point is to attack the enemy's AI system without using AI. Otherwise it's still the same AI versus AI race that will most likely end bad for humans at some point.

by ljd 5y ago

Famous last words. As an AI practitioner, I want us invest in research to manipulate other AI military systems but not use AI ourselves. Take a page from the HFT book.

tolbish 5y ago

I am curious where you would draw the line between "AI military systems" and existing systems in use such as Iron Dome and other algorithm-assisted weapons.

eternalban 5y ago
Two obvious dimensions are: - agency: the machine makes decisions on its own. - defensive vs offensive action
- Sebb767 5y ago
  > - defensive vs offensive action So if Iron dome launches a rocket in defense it's okay, but that rocket mustn't use AI to find its target? I see your general point, but that's going to be a line that's very hard to draw.
- tolbish 5y ago
  Perhaps I'm missing something, but that first dimension seems far from obvious. To continue my Iron Dome example, isn't the system making decisions on its own when intercepting anything it classifies as an incoming ballistic threats?
  - eternalban 5y ago
    These are obvious dimensions that need to be considered. Of course there can be discussion as to boundaries drawn in that (here 2-d) space as to 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable'. There may be other dimensions as well, such as 'decision making input sources', etc. As to your specific example, while system x may have 'full agency (autonomous, willful)', if it is purely 'defensive' in nature, it may indeed fall within acceptable zone.
    - tolbish 5y ago
      And as for completely offensive weapons controlled by humans? Your metric seems arbitrary. Why (only) two dimensions?
- Dah00n 5y ago
  Well, you already watered it down to be a worthless principle when "AI bad" became "AI sometimes bad". OP said "not use AI". Using AI for example in missiles for defence is an offensive weapon as after the defense by the AI you are stronger than without it and you cannot take out missiles without attacking. The point is to attack the enemy's AI system without using AI. Otherwise it's still the same AI versus AI race that will most likely end bad for humans at some point.