spl757

I don't know. Perhaps if you elaborate a little more I can answer.

A couple of things to clarify: I can understand how you see it that way because I wasn't clear enough.

I don't beleive I characterized what I'm asking in the way you are putting it.

I never said that Ukraine is evil. I competely support and stand with the Ukranian Government and it's people, and I think we, as a country, should be supporting them and their fight to not be conqoured.

Clearly, if I post on a technical forum and am asking a question it is because I don't know the answer. I know how I see it. What I don't know is how everyone else sees it, and that's my motivation. I'm wondering if I'm right or I'm wrong, and have faith that the denizens of the internet will let me know one way or another.

I am asking a legit question and not trying to troll. I am, admittedly, agaist the use of AI on the battlefield, but as it pertains to Ukraine they are defending their existence.

It's not so much that AI hallucinates, but the fact that we know it does, and it's being used to make independent decisions to use lethal force against a human on the battlefield today.

At least that is my understanding of one of the ways that Ukraine is asymmetrically winning against a foe in Russia with more resources, at least at the start.

It's how we are using it knowing this limitation it has and the decisions being made about when and where it's being used in this capacity are mostly unknown.

I never said anything about ChatGPT.

And that AIs do aim at intended targets with intent to kill while simultaneously being susceptible to hallucinations is exactly what worries me.

Also, why do people keep talking about landmines? I'm talking about software, you are talking about dumb mechanical things from WWII. This isn't a philosophical question about methods of warfare from the past, but the software that controls the dumb hardware.

I'd prefer a world without war, rather than one that is starting to make the movie Terminator 2: Judgement Day a reality.

I guess what I'm really asking is whether or not it's moral and ethical to use AI that targets autonomously? My understanding is that it's being used that way, but I can't back that up and I'll take your word for it if that's not the case. But it is certainly a plausible scenario. Everyone invested in AI seems determined to put it in everything because they need consumers to want to pay for it, and right now they haven't figured out a way to earn back from consumers the over a trillion dollars that has been put into the AI bubble. I don't have much faith that the people with billions invested don't want return on their investment, and I don't think they care about the consequences necessary to get it back.

edit for clarity

yes, yes it absfuckinglutely is. IMHO

AI drones are being used to autonomously target and kill targets by the Ukraine using technology they have been given. That's real. Right now. That that is happening anywhere on the planet scares me. That's why I keep asking about AI hallucinating, and it's implications when the stakes are life and death.

I'm not talking about a hypothetical. I'm talking about Ukraine assymetrically fucking up the Russians with AI drones.

Perhaps you should be concerned about it. I certainly am. This is deployed on the battlefield and has been for months.

I'm talking about software being allowed to make the decision to put bullets through a human being without any human in the chain except the dead guy.

I'm asking a legitimate question, and only two people have actually tried to make an argument.

Most, like you, have nothing useful to contribute.

please explain how you have discerned that people earnestly disagree with me?

One of the problems with this is companies and governments have invested 1.5 Trillion dollars on the bet that AI would revolution everything and reshape the world. AI companies lose money. All of the money invested is being recirculated among the major players in the game. It's not the people paying money for AI as a product, it's the companies wanting so badly for that to happen that they have created a spending bubble not too dissimlar to the sub-prime mortgage disaster that resulted in the housing bubble to burst. This is no different. AI companies have proven that they cannot make a profit at this point. There's 1.5 trillion at stake, and who do you think is going to be left holding the bag? My guess is the people.

I only run models I can run locally. Perhaps I'm framing my question incorrectly.

AI is being used in contexts that involve life and death. Being right more often is not good enough in that context. If we are going to put AI in drones and have them autonomously acquire and fire on enemies, perhaps the fact that all AI hallucinates at all makes it morally and ethically unusable for purposes in which the stakes are very high, such as life and death.

This is what scares me about it. And also what I was able to accomplish air-gapped with a Ryzen 7 and RTX 3060 12GB scared me.

This is not the kind of thing we should all have to speculate about, someone should have solid answers. Perhaps the fact that some, and maybe most, AI models are black boxes even to those that trained them, should have been the first red flag and that was years ago.

I'm hoping for more than anecdotes. I believe AI is not ready for what it's being used for, but all I get are downvotes and no citations. Maybe all of you are just scared to say it out loud?

Would you trust it to make life and death decisions? Because it is being used in that context. Drones with AI, armed, and with discretion to choose a target and kill it.

All AI hallucinates, and therefore is unpredictable and unreliable. 1.5 trillion dollars to prove the obvious. It has no place in production use. IMHO at least. They want so badly to get rid of all of us, and replace us with something that doesn't complain, doesn't have kids, or outside lives or want ick, vacations. Most of you are paycheck to paycheck, statistically speaking, so you have a vested interest in how this all turns out.

edit: I get it, it's not a popular opinion.

But am I wrong?

If the problem of hallucination in AI has been solved, maybe I missed it?

Dollars to donuts it isn't just tiktok and instragram. If it's on the internet and not end-to-end encrypted with the proper ciphers it's being monitored. Shit, the police and feds keep things they can't decipher hoping they can in the future.

My rule of thumb is that if it's technically possible, someone, somewhere is doing it.

SETI@Home used unused CPU in the form of a screensaver to comb through data sets that came from the famous, but now destroyed, Aricebo radio telescope. Such a shame what happened to it.

Greed.

This shifts the blame, and they get the data to sell to data brokers. Less accountability, same access to info.

These laws are so short-sited and willfully ignorant of the unintended consequences. The constitution provides rights and protections, and the government cannot compel speech. This will be appealed on consititional grounds and reversed. If not, I'd ban any Illinois resident from being able to use the site and redirect them to their local government representation. Compelled speech is just one attack the law is open to.

All AI hallucinates. What could possibly go wrong.

I've been putting off switching to GrapheneOS but it seems like a prudent idea now.

That plane still looks bad-ass today. I heard that they just leak oil constantly on the ground before the engines warm up and the metal expands the the O rings make a seal.

If you are running this stuff on a cheap VPS with limited bandwidth, you will not want all of your traffic being routed as ingress and egress as that could easily eat your monthly bandwidth limit depending on the size of files and frequency.

I've been trying since yesterday to attach a new ubuntu install to Ubuntu Pro. 'sudo pro attach' runs, and gives me the key to enter on the link they provide but I just get '502 Bad Gateway. Is anyone else experiencing this?

I remember when Plex wasn't a money grab. Many moons ago.