Opened inkscape for the first time and put together something now that these ai companies are just flat out saying that we don’t deserve ram.

  • Blibittyblah@futurology.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 day ago

    Why does it need to be profitable to be funded and used by the government as a weapon? Allowing people to use it is literally giving the government access to see everything, from systems to thoughts.

    So, I’d say it’s profitable af.

    • h0tbeef@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Someone would still need to pay for it, regardless of how useful it is.

      Useful is not the same thing as profitable.

      AI is not being used as a weapon, it is being used as an accountability sink for the people using the weapons. Also useful, but not profitable.

        • h0tbeef@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I think we have a disagreement about what counts as a weapon.

          The missles that the US military willfully deployed to triple tap the children’s school in Iran were weapons. The AI “Targeting systems” that told them that children’s school was a valid target is not a “weapon” in the sense that it doesn’t do anything other than identify “targets”.

          The purpose of this is to allow the user to knowingly commit war crimes, while being able to put the accountability for target acquisition onto the AI.

          Israel uses it in the same way to prosecute their ongoing genocide of the Palestinians.

          Do you know of an alternate way in which the AI is being used as a weapon? I haven’t heard of one, but i would be interested to learn new information.

          (To be clear, I am in no way pro-AI, and i do not think the way that it is being used in war is acceptable. I just don’t think an LLM constitutes a weapon in and of itself)

          • Blibittyblah@futurology.today
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            The weapon is ai being used to attack in a cyber war… or locally in silencing disobedience. Weapons don’t always have to blow up.

            • h0tbeef@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 day ago

              They can use them to hack, yeah, thats fair.

              What do you mean by “locally in silencing disobedience”?

              • Blibittyblah@futurology.today
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 day ago

                Employing them to hack locally. If someone is causing trouble, go hack them. I use the term hack very very loosely just to illustrate the point. I just see like a 1990s montage of people typing on keyboards with really cool haircuts that were edgy for the time.

                It can also be used to spread misinformation. We have already seen Grok Spit out some very offensive stuff. What if people stop challenging it or it starts doing it in such a way that no one notices? That is even better than propaganda. Literally having the ability to answer someone’s question in such a way that it can change their opinion.

                Fuuuuukkkingggg rrraaawwww pooooweeerrrr.

                We are so fucked 🙃🙂🙃

            • h0tbeef@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Thats not a great analogy

              A gun doesn’t obfuscate your accountability

              It would be more accurate of my argument to say “carbombs are weapons, cars are not weapons”

              Neither of those analogies cover the element of obfuscating accountability tho, which again, is what they are using the AI to do.

              You do not need AI to blow up a children’s school.

              You use the AI so you can say “oops, i didn’t mean to triple tap that children’s school, the computer told me it was terrorists”

              • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                The fact that AI obfuscates responsibility doesn’t actually change its role. AI trained to pick targets are obviously weapons.

                They’re just autonomous weapons, or maybe more similar to mines. Set it and forget it! If they walk on the mine, that’s their fault.

                • h0tbeef@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  My understanding of the way theyre using it is that it is not directly in charge of munitions.

                  Which is to say, the AI does not fire the missle, a human fires the missle. That human is (theoretically) able to dodge accountability because they just pretend to believe what the AI says is completely accurate.

                  Imagine a sniper rifle with a thermal scope. The scope is detachable, it can be used without the gun, but not as a weapon. The gun can be used without the scope, as a weapon, and has other methods of target acquisition available (iron sights if nothing else).

                  When you look through the thermal scope you see a heat signiature, but it obfuscates if the target is an enemy or a civilian. So using the heat scope allows you to pretend that you thought the civilians you murdered were actually enemy combatants.

                  A mine doesn’t need a human to detonate it, and the powers that be are not (yet) psychotic enough to give control of the weapons systems to the AI.

                  • queermunist she/her@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    I’m still not sure how you’re getting “doesn’t count as a weapon” from that.

                    A thermal scope that obfuscates the target sure as shit seems like it’s a weapon designed to kill civilians.