April Fools alarm aside, on other alarms, I note that the contractual argument between the War Department and Anthropic was really about Dario’s discomfort with the fact that the “kill list” that has been the main US strategy in Iran was essentially written by Claude working with Palantir and then executed with minimal human oversight about who the human targets actually were and what the collateral damage actually was. This is extrapolating from the head of Amnesty Tech’s (Amnesty International’s anti-AI murder arm) extensive interview on Al Jazeera about two weeks ago; we should hang out with that guy, he seems great. Dario didn’t break up with the government because of what they might do in the future; he got out of the contract because he didn’t want any more blood on his and his AI’s hands than they already have. And it’s a lot of blood. It appears that Sam Altman doesn’t give a shit and is happy to have OpenAI lead strategy and the generation of kill lists for future wars.
Separately, autonomous drones with lethal authority (ostensibly to get around Russian electronic countermeasures and jamming) have been known to be operating for at least a couple weeks in the Ukraine theater and likely in testing for much longer. They would certainly be deployed by both sides in a US / China WW3.
Giant laser beams and microwave guns are now being used in warfare. Russia is threatening to launch nuclear missiles permanently in earth orbit. China’s space weapons may have leapt ahead of US space weapons over the course of the last year.
All of the pieces are adding up for the classic Skynet vision but evil or unknowingly morally ambiguous singleton probably more likely than that. I remain optimistic but only for reasons the rationalists consider a joke. They’ll come around to my views eventually if we live though. Basically aliens/NHI/external timeline muckery.
So all the disagreement downvotes are because I am sticking to my talking point that the rationalists are wrong about how to make decisions that around situations where there is only circumstantial and not scientific evidence, right? No one is disputing the facts of the first three paragraphs, right?
April Fools alarm aside, on other alarms, I note that the contractual argument between the War Department and Anthropic was really about Dario’s discomfort with the fact that the “kill list” that has been the main US strategy in Iran was essentially written by Claude working with Palantir and then executed with minimal human oversight about who the human targets actually were and what the collateral damage actually was. This is extrapolating from the head of Amnesty Tech’s (Amnesty International’s anti-AI murder arm) extensive interview on Al Jazeera about two weeks ago; we should hang out with that guy, he seems great. Dario didn’t break up with the government because of what they might do in the future; he got out of the contract because he didn’t want any more blood on his and his AI’s hands than they already have. And it’s a lot of blood. It appears that Sam Altman doesn’t give a shit and is happy to have OpenAI lead strategy and the generation of kill lists for future wars.
Separately, autonomous drones with lethal authority (ostensibly to get around Russian electronic countermeasures and jamming) have been known to be operating for at least a couple weeks in the Ukraine theater and likely in testing for much longer. They would certainly be deployed by both sides in a US / China WW3.
Giant laser beams and microwave guns are now being used in warfare. Russia is threatening to launch nuclear missiles permanently in earth orbit. China’s space weapons may have leapt ahead of US space weapons over the course of the last year.
All of the pieces are adding up for the classic Skynet vision but evil or unknowingly morally ambiguous singleton probably more likely than that. I remain optimistic but only for reasons the rationalists consider a joke. They’ll come around to my views eventually if we live though. Basically aliens/NHI/external timeline muckery.
Aside; the lack of mention of the Anthropic/DoW conflict is a hole in the post.
So all the disagreement downvotes are because I am sticking to my talking point that the rationalists are wrong about how to make decisions that around situations where there is only circumstantial and not scientific evidence, right? No one is disputing the facts of the first three paragraphs, right?