Why am I not comforted...
... When it doesn't say that it won't source from Cyberdyne Systems?
...Cirdan...
Good news, everyone: The US military says it will be ethically minded about how it develops AI
The US Department of Defense has formally adopted a set principles to ensure the ethical development and deployment of AI technology for military use. "We owe it to the American people and to our men and women in uniform to adopt AI ethics principles that reflect our nation's values of a free and open society," Lieutenant …
-
-
-
Wednesday 26th February 2020 10:35 GMT CrazyOldCatMan
Re: whose values?
first, do no headlines
Sounds very much like the rules for Government bodies and those who do business with them! From personal experience[1] anyway..
[1] "We don't want to see anything that results in headlines in the Daily Mail".. said to me by a fairly senior bureaucrat.
-
-
-
-
Tuesday 25th February 2020 22:18 GMT Chris G
Re: Ethically minded AI
There was.nothing in the five areas of concern in the article that had or mentioned anything to do with ethics.
Besides, ethics to the military are not having their own kit bite them in the arse and not being held accountable for anything they do wrong/ that goes wrong/ that is wrong.
-
-
Tuesday 25th February 2020 13:04 GMT Mage
But!
Sacking a Canadian city (thinking GB was too busy with Napoleon, GB then burnt down gov buildings in Washington)
Dresden
Fire bombing Tokyo
A bombs needlessly on two Japanese cities
Arming a banana company to overthrow a South American government
Attempted invasion of Cuba
Promoting cocaine production to overthrow a South American government
Cruise missiles against Iraq
Arming Afghan Muslims against Russians
Echelon and later spying on everyone
Actual invasion of UK Colony, Granada
Illegal spying on own citizens
Extraordinary Rendition
Multiple attacks using drones in Pakistan, who they are not even at war with.
Refusal to extradite USA citizens
Refusal to allow 3rd party trials of US soldiers. Much violation of civilians at Okinawa.
They don't know what ethics are, or think they only apply to others.
-
Wednesday 26th February 2020 00:32 GMT veti
Re: But!
In nearly every case on your list, the decision was made by politicians, not by the military.
Sacking a Canadian city (thinking GB was too busy with Napoleon, GB then burnt down gov buildings in Washington)
This was more than 200 years ago. Exactly how long do you hold a grudge?
Dresden
Fire bombing Tokyo
A bombs needlessly on two Japanese cities
All depends what you consider "needless". Did the US "need" to nuke Hiroshima? No, of course not, they could have spent another million American lives (and likely ten times as many Japanese) instead. But someone has to make those judgment calls.
Actual invasion of UK Colony, Granada
Granada is a city in Andalusia. You probably mean Grenada, which gained independence from Britain some ten years before the US invaded (to reverse an internal military coup).
Multiple attacks using drones in Pakistan, who they are not even at war with.
They're not at war with Arizona, either, but federal agents kill people there on quite a regular basis. Frankly I'd rather they attacked with drones than using, say, nerve agents in a perfume bottle, or polonium in tea.
Refusal to extradite USA citizens
From Wikipedia: "From January 2004 to the end of December 2011, seven known US citizens were extradited from the US to the UK.[19]" The "extradition" nonsense is pure bullshit.
Refusal to allow 3rd party trials of US soldiers. Much violation of civilians at Okinawa.
Now this? - this is the only item on your list where I'll concede the point. But even there, I'll point out that some sort of "limited legal immunity" is standard pretty much everywhere soldiers - of any nationality - are stationed abroad. I don't recall British troops in Iraq, for instance, being prosecuted by Iraqi courts all that many times.
-
Monday 9th March 2020 20:35 GMT ILLQO
Re: But!
No need to concede on that, if the country is relatively friendly the US will arrange a Couch with the host country covering that its troops can be tried for crimes in that country (basically a listing of what the host country can and cannot try for) reasoning behind this is it shows we trust the host country but does limit what our troops can by tried for:
A la yes you can try our troops for stealing, assault, etc.
No you cannot try our troops for leaning against a religious building on Fridays.
The beauty of this too is that once you have been tried and served your penance for whatever crime you committed in the host country you then get tried and sentenced for whatever you did again but this time by a military court.
But yes, typically militaries do not like local countries prosecuting its soldiers, especially if the soldiers are operating within the guidelines of their orders. Especially since many a country that troops get ordered to spend their time in have courts that are easily corrupted and/or are controlled by the local religious leaders and altering laws quickly to hurt your troops or eat up resources in court would be too easy.
-
-
Tuesday 25th February 2020 13:28 GMT Allan George Dyer
Not reassured at all...
"ability to detect and avoid unintended consequences"
Note that "target not killed" would be an unintended consequence.
"the ability to disengage or deactivate deployed systems that demonstrate unintended behavior"
How long before the AI learns that is must deactivate the deactivation system to be sure of completing its mission? There was a documentary about this.
-
Tuesday 25th February 2020 16:03 GMT amanfromMars 1
For Exponential Existential Growth in Any and Every Marketable Sector/Capitalised Vector
The department will design and engineer AI capabilities to fulfill their intended functions while possessing the ability to detect and avoid unintended consequences, and the ability to disengage or deactivate deployed systems that demonstrate unintended behavior
That's the real tricky one to master with remote command via virtual controls. With such being Ethereal Intangibles, is it impossible to physically attack, nor is it possible to prevent deployed systems administrations from doing as their AI Servers and IT Services would wish/desire/want/need with the Future Feeding and Seeding Novel Input for SMARTR Output ...... which ideally is always an Enriched and Enriching Product.
-
Monday 9th March 2020 20:39 GMT ILLQO
Re: For Exponential Existential Growth in Any and Every Marketable Sector/Capitalised Vector
man from mars makes a good point, allowing some degree of local control removes the ability for opponents to block or alter inputs leading to poor or disastrous behavior in the bots. You cannot remove the controls if the device brings the controls with it.
But and this is his second point, once the device is acting autonomously if it decides its going to do something disastrous it is specifically built to prevent access and its possible it could keep going until control is regained.
I think he thinks this juxtaposition is funny. Decoding him is one of my favorite things on this site.
-
-
-
Tuesday 25th February 2020 22:58 GMT Son 1
Re: Ethics?
I agree. They have no ethics at all in my eyes. Since they are still torturing people and are still running Guantanamo bay in a country that they will not allow American citizens to visit is disgusting! Until they close that place, apologize and put thoses responsible behind bars, I too say " FUCK YOU".!!!
-
-
Wednesday 26th February 2020 01:25 GMT Mark Exclamation
Re: Greater concern
I was going to say much the same thing, but you beat me to it. If we take the US military's statement at face value (which is, admittedly, difficult to do), the Chinese and the Russians are not going to be constrained by the same conditions. Be very afraid of what they will produce.
-
Biting the hand that feeds IT
