Why American tech companies need to help build AI weaponry

First we invent a machine to kill, then someone invents a machine to kill that machine, and so on. We call this progress. An endless cycle of violence perpetuated by the pursuit of one group&#x27;s security at the expense of another&#x27;s.<p>Is warfare a fact of life? Maybe. But to take actions which logically and demonstrably create the very insecurity they are meant to avoid is irrational. Point this out and you are branded an idealist. &quot;Humanity is doomed to violence, so always be ready to kill&quot; is apparently sage wisdom.

It&#x27;s not a foregone conclusion. We have managed to ban chemical weapons. laser blinding weapons and biological weapons on a global scale. If there was sufficient will to do so, we could do this for autonomous weapons as well.<p>The argument that &quot;bad people will do X&quot;, so we must do X to them first, is a race to the bottom.<p>This article is, however, very revealing about what Palantir <i>wants</i> to happen, without ever mentioning the profit motive.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.is&#x2F;J0JUe" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.is&#x2F;J0JUe</a>

The whole human in the loop thing sure seems to be getting quieter by the minute.

No.

I agree with very little of this, but good to know what Palantir thinks we should be spending our effort on.

When does AI become smart enough to “lift all boats”?

Make code, not war

&gt; The record of humanity’s management of the [nuclear] weapon — imperfect and, indeed, dozens of times nearly catastrophic — has been remarkable. Nearly a century of some version of peace has prevailed in the world without a great-power military conflict.<p>This is so offensive. I am infuriated. The last hundred years has been anything but peace for Middle East. You can continue not caring from SF.