177

The Pentagon Is Accelerating AI and Autonomous Technology America’s military leaders are racing to deploy thousands of autonomous weapons and an AI-powered air monitoring system for Washington D.C.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] lolola 64 points 1 year ago

Maybe can we take a step back and ask whether we need thousands of AI defense bots at all? Or are we past that point?

[-] Wookie@artemis.camp 17 points 1 year ago

Realistically, who’s gonna stop them?

[-] Something_Complex@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

I believe in you, or should I say, gggrrrrrrruuuuuuuuu(pardon my wokie I only had one semester in college)

[-] astraeus@programming.dev 5 points 1 year ago

How is it that when it comes to reckless ideas and notions Congress takes millions of years and the Pentagon takes no more than three business days to implement?

[-] JayDee@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 year ago

Autonomous drones made by China have been used in Papua New Guinea to bomb at least one village so I think the US is actually behind the curve in terms of the AI arms race.

This is one of those classical sci-fi apocalypse ideas, where humans make autonomous war machines they can't turn off, and the machines outlive the humans and continue the war for them.

[-] Sylver@lemmy.world 38 points 1 year ago

Most military networks are closed circuit by design. I’m not sure how this could be implemented without also allowing back doors to be exploited. You wouldn’t want someone to be able to turn off your defenses as they begin an attack, for example.

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 5 points 1 year ago

There are a number of ways to do it. You can transmit a one-time code to the device that you set up right beforehand. No one's going to be able to guess your 1024 character one-time password.

You can even protect the password entry program itself with port knocking. If the right ports aren't accessed in the right sequence, the enemy doesn't even get a chance to try their passwords.

Every server is on the Internet 99.999% of the time. They are constantly being tested. The right cybersecurity tools are available now.

[-] max@feddit.nl 5 points 1 year ago

Just make the code 00000 like the nuclear launch codes were for years.

[-] otter@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

I'm sure (or at least I hope) nuclear weapons have similar systems in place so that they can be launched or shut off as needed?

In what ways would this be different

[-] Vendetta9076@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 year ago

Yeah, they don't. Nuclear systems are for the most part closed sourced and built on DOS level hardware. Most of that shit can't connect to the internet even if they wanted it to. The system you're thinking about is radio waves between people talking.

[-] otter@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 year ago

Makes sense :)

[-] zepheriths@lemmy.world 17 points 1 year ago

The department of defense was hacked just a few years ago, suck a button would have to have access to an internet. Meaning anyone could get to it and shut off the drones and such

[-] TotalCasual@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

They'll just murder a bunch of people and then be turned off after having been shown to be ~~ineffective~~ too dangerous.

It's not like AI is reliable at this point. Way too many people are actively ignoring experts pointing this fact out and instead obsessing over Skynet or w/e made up sci-fi BS.

Rather than be used for war, they'll be used for threats of violence and propaganda. It's not a new problem. It's just a new version of that same problem.

[-] winky88@startrek.website 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Rather than be used for war, they’ll be used for threats of violence and propaganda

Surveillance is the word you're looking for. Take all those NSA pipelines and run them through an AI and BAM, you've got your "terrorists".

AI will be downfall of our technological society, but not because of killer robots and malevolent systems. It's going to make everyone completely and utterly incompetent at everything in life.

[-] TotalCasual@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago
[-] JayDee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

It should be noted that individuals at the forefront of AI research have a direct bias against saying AI is dangerous. It's their job, and saying anything which presents this research as dangerous could halt funding, and put them out of a job. It's also their passion, though, so it's an even bigger deal for them.

We have also seen individuals who have exited AI research calling for more regulation and ethics requirements. At the same time we are seeing AI ethics departments dismantled. These should stand out as red flags.

Autonomous drones are actively being used to bomb villages in Papua New Guinea. The idea that this kind of tech is "only going to be used for threats of violence and propaganda" is already outdated. It's being used today, and the US just plans to also adopt the tech itself.

[-] Stuka@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No. Such a thing would only be a good idea if you want the enemy to be able to turn your shit off when they please.

You're thinking of 'AI', as something intelligent that can go rogue. Current and near future that's just sci fi.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Military AI is already going rogue. It doesn't need general intelligence to act unpredictably.

[-] Stuka@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's called a bug - aka what it's called when a program behaves unexpectedly and against design intentions.

That's not going rogue, that's doing what it was programmed to do.

By your standards you'd also have to consider WW2 acoustic homing torpedos as rogue AI because they might home in on the ship that fired them.

Edit:

A followup thought: the only real question is whether they can realistically test and refine these systems enough to trust them to carry out attacks autonomously without serious errors.vIm gonna guess no, but they'll use them anyway.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Your edit follows the point I was making. It doesn't need to truly "go rogue" according to your definition, and it doesn't need general intelligence to have the same disastrous outcome. We have examples of AI killing humans to accomplish the goal it is given, so we need to be damned sure that's not going to happen in real life before deploying them over Washington DC.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

That’s what they want you to believe. All hail the robot overlords!

[-] x4740N@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago

Or how about not building them at all

[-] techietechtecherson@lemmy.zip 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sounds like the beginnings of the plot to Horizon Dawn. Can’t have it both ways, either it’s a secure closed system with no way to stop it if it goes rogue or it has safety’s built in but then those could be exploited.

[-] 6mementomori@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago

humanity sucks

[-] NekoKamiGuru@ttrpg.network 9 points 1 year ago

There is also a danger that the kill switch command could be leaked to the Russians or the Chinese who would use it to shut down the USA's defenses just before a full scale invasion of a now defenseless USA.

[-] BloodyFable@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I don't think the robots are the only military America would have. The military is kind of their thing.

[-] Zozano@aussie.zone 9 points 1 year ago

should there be an "all off" button?

NO! Movies would be so much more entertaining if the bad guy learned the error of his ways but was still unable to stop the robot slaughter.

[-] ProfessorZhu@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

There really would be no way to have an interface that shuts it down, that an AI wouldn't be able to compromise. Though I imagine the military will set up a plan to blow up it's connections to power and the internet should it go rouge.

[-] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago

People use the term AI too loosely. We don't actually have artificial intelligence. We have neural networks that can perform tasks based on training data, but it's not actually intelligent by any means. That said, fully autonomous systems have existed for decades already. Look up CIWS or CRAM.

[-] ProfessorZhu@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I'm not going to get into a "no real Scottsman" arugement about the advancements in this field

[-] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

Good lord. You're talking about programs being smart enough to disable their own killswitch. That's not a fucking thing.

[-] Uncle_Sheo217@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I wonder what would go down if a CWIS managed to go rogue. Like I know it’s literally impossible, but if it was what would it do? Would a Phalanx just fire 20mm at random? It’s an interesting hypothetical imo. Obv I agree with you that current tech is most def not even close to smart enough to disable their own programming

[-] Fosheze@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

The Phalanx does auto target. It just can't fire on its own. They're designed to shoot down missiles and humans can't aim that fast so they're fully autonomous except for the fire control. From what I remember targets are assigned and prioritized by the AEGIS system on the ship but the Phalanx is designed to do all of the actual targeting on it's own so that if the ship targeting stuff is damaged it can still function perfectly fine without it.

Theres a short video out there of a phalanx targeting and tracking a passenger plane. Aparently they're also known to track birds and people walking around on the the ship.

So as far as one going rogue, all it would take is for the person in the control room to give it the fire command at the wrong time. Of course they fire at 4,500 rounds per minute and their large magazine only holds 1,550 rounds, so it's spree of carnage would be pretty short lived.

[-] ProfessorZhu@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

I'm assuming that op was asking about something like this I had read about it before the air force denied it and I imagine most people who have seen that haven't seen the denial. They were also asking about what the military is "looking to build" I was trying to meet the op where they were and you came in with a pointless "akshully!"

[-] AmidFuror@kbin.social 2 points 1 year ago

Better dead than rouge, I always say.

[-] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 8 points 1 year ago

and an AI-powered air monitoring system for Washington D.C.

This is the most troubling to me. They're entrenching themselves. They already wrapped razor wire and concrete walls around the white house. Now they're deploying military assets on US soil.

[-] redballooon@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago

They have been deploying military equipment for decades now on US soil, under the guise of police.

The new development here is that this system depends on far fewer humans and their consciousness.

[-] kebabslob 7 points 1 year ago

More likely we'll see a button to instantly transfer money from tax payer pockets to these companies' CEO's pockets

[-] reflex@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

More likely we’ll see a button to instantly transfer money from tax payer pockets to these companies’ CEO’s pockets

Don't forget to add the option to tip that's in vogue for everything these days.

[-] PupBiru@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

Would you like to add a tip for your robot defenders to this months subscription fee for AI Protection Max Ultra (tm)?

[-] kebabslob 2 points 1 year ago

Sorry I tipped my landlord my last penny

[-] wahming@monyet.cc 7 points 1 year ago

Most people in this thread need to learn the difference between AI and AGI

[-] CaptObvious@literature.cafe 6 points 1 year ago

Sounds like the opening to the most recent Battlestar Galactica series. A kill switch can be hacked.

[-] reflex@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago
[-] cley_faye@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

I'm sorry Dave. I'm afraid I can't do that.

[-] Tekchip@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Anti-robotics is where the money is.

[-] stringere@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Are armor penetrating EMP rounds a thing yet?

[-] snooggums@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Age of Ultrom 2: Electric Boogaloo

this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2023
177 points (100.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

35726 readers
791 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS