It only sounds problematic to someone who cares about the lives of ordinary people. But that’s not the sort of person who dedicates their whole life to increasing their own wealth and power by any means necessary. Those are the people that get to make the decisions.
Risks of the AI going amok set aside there’s something appealing in not risking human lifes during conflicts. Karmically or economically wise. Also you remove the limitations of human bodies -suddenly your airframe can give 100% of its capabilities without turning the pilot in a milkshake.
Removing humans from your side of the war lowers the cost of going to war and allows for even more centralized power. It’s a lot easier to do morally bankrupt acts if you don’t need to convinced a group of human soldiers to do it. Clearly you can anyway a lot of the time, but going for the robots is a lot cheaper/less risky.
It’s pretty obvious why powerful people would want this and why it would be terrible for the rest of us even without worrying about a hypothetical sky net future.
It’s a lot easier to murder with robots, but they’re going to need new models if they want to replace all the raping, pillaging, bureaucratic corruption, oppression, etc…
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
Why are the people in power always biased towards the most brain dead decisions? Does this not sound wrong to any of them?
It only sounds problematic to someone who cares about the lives of ordinary people. But that’s not the sort of person who dedicates their whole life to increasing their own wealth and power by any means necessary. Those are the people that get to make the decisions.
Ah, my mistake.
Military intelligence is to intelligence, what military music is to music.
Risks of the AI going amok set aside there’s something appealing in not risking human lifes during conflicts. Karmically or economically wise. Also you remove the limitations of human bodies -suddenly your airframe can give 100% of its capabilities without turning the pilot in a milkshake.
Removing humans from your side of the war lowers the cost of going to war and allows for even more centralized power. It’s a lot easier to do morally bankrupt acts if you don’t need to convinced a group of human soldiers to do it. Clearly you can anyway a lot of the time, but going for the robots is a lot cheaper/less risky.
It’s pretty obvious why powerful people would want this and why it would be terrible for the rest of us even without worrying about a hypothetical sky net future.
It’s a lot easier to murder with robots, but they’re going to need new models if they want to replace all the raping, pillaging, bureaucratic corruption, oppression, etc…
There’s plenty of training material for those around I understand…