My patron saint

I attended a federal contracting conference a few months ago, and they had one of these things (or a variant) walking around the lobby.

From talking to the guy who was babysitting it, they can operate autonomously in units or be controlled in a general way (think higher level unit deployment and firing policies rather than individual remote control) given a satellite connection. In a panel at the same conference, they were discussing AI safety, and I asked:

Given that AI seems to be developing from less complex tasks like chess (which is still complicated, obviously, but a constrained problem) to more complex and ill-defined tasks like image generation, it seems that it's inevitable that we will develop AI capable of providing strategic or tactical plans, if we haven't already. If two otherwise-equally-matched military units are fighting, it seems reasonable to believe that the one using an AI to make decisions within seconds would win over the one with human leadership, simply because they would react more quickly to changing battlefield conditions. This would place an enormous incentive on the US military to adopt AI assisted strategic control, which would likely lead to units of autonomous weapons which are also controlled by an autonomous system. Do any of you have any concerns about this, and if so, do you have any ideas about how we can mitigate the problem.

(Paraphrasing, obviously, but this is close)

The panel members looked at each other, looked at me, smiled, shrugged, and didn't say anything. The moderator asked them explicitly if they would like to respond, and they all declined.

I think we're at the point where an AI could be used to create strategies, and I would be very surprised if no one were trying to do this. We already have autonomous weapons, and it's only a matter of time before someone starts putting them together. Yeah, they will generally act reasonably, because they'll be trained on human tactics in a variety of scenarios, but that will be cold comfort to dead civilians who happened to get in the way of a hallucinating strategic model.

EDIT: I know I'm not actually addressing anything you said, but you seem to have thought about this a bit, and I was curious about what you thought of this scenario.

I was home schooled from childhood through highschool. I got a GED before I joined the military, then used the GI bill to go to university and took placement tests for everything, which put me at the same level as everyone else except for trigonometry, which I had to take a remedial class in.

Yeah, the US grade system up to highschool. I haven't done those grades at all.

Never have I ever gone to school in grades K-12.

Thanks for the PTSD flashback. It was delightful.

Bonus fucked

Just wait until they start serving ads for things that don't exist and then throwing manufacturing together to make them on demand.

No one I fought with was helping kill brown kids either. You could argue that we were indirectly helping, since we were fighting for a country that was also sometimes bombing areas with civilians. If that's how you would like to approach this, then everyone helped.

If you've worked in retail then you've sold goods to soldiers, if you work in agriculture then you've fed them, and if you're a teacher then you educated them. Some small fraction of those soldiers went on to bomb kids somewhere.

If you want to criticize the US policy of invading other countries on a pretext and then propping up governments that do what we want, go ahead. I'm right there with you. If you want to live in a fantasy where all soldiers are merciless baby-killers, I guess you can do that, but that's where we part ways.

Soldiers are individuals, and they sign up for all sorts of reasons. A very common reason is an education that gives them a better shot at a high paying job so that they can care for their family or start one. Is it fucked that people feel the need to do that? Sure. Would it be great if there was a straight forward way for a person with no resources to get an education and a better job? Yes.

But currently, we're in an environment where risking your life to fight for your country in an unjust war is the best option some people have. And pretending that the reason they do it is because they're Bad People doesn't help solve the problem.

None of the veterans I know killed any brown kids. The people we shot were generally either shooting at us, or had just set off an IED with a car battery. Most of our interactions with kids involved someone getting in trouble for giving away MREs to the kids that would walk up to the vehicle.

Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice, Beetlejuice

Going meta is always allowed. Just say you're dumbing it down, that you don't mean to be condescending, and invite them to interrupt if they already understand.

I'm imagining the mob standing around the guy scratching their heads, with the noose pulled all the way up to the branch.

Women are you doing the same thing for me

If you're the smartest person in the room, then you're in the wrong room.

Why not?

My planes had groups, but I don't think they were grouped by seat.

I'm not going to lie, I'd probably pay money to be in the room. I can only imagine how awkward and hilarious it would be to see a silent and fuming Trump get edged up by a middle aged black man who's busy having a conversation with the next barber over.

Burn the heretic.

Ah yeah, true. Even with minor exceptions, I still feel like it could be done better. I'm just bitter because I had to take four different planes this week.