Autonomous lethal weapons (ALWs; we need a more eerie, memetic name) could make the difference. Against the "realists", whereas bias is not a new problem, ALWs emphatically are. Likewise no reflexive optimism from the boosters lessens the need for sober regulation to lessen the self-evident risk of ALWs.
And this provides a "narrative through-line" for regulation - we must regulate ALWs, and so, AI systems that could design ALWs. It follows, we must regulate AI systems that design other AI systems in general, and so too, we must therefore regulate AI artifi... (read more)
I think ALWs are already more of a "realist" cause than a doomer cause. To
doomers, they're a distraction - a superintelligence can kill you with or
without them.
ALWs also seem to be held to an unrealistic standard compared to existing
weapons. With present-day technology, they'll probably hit the wrong target more
often than human-piloted drones. But will they hit the wrong target more often
than landmines, cluster munitions, and over-the-horizon unguided artillery
barrages, all of which are being used in Ukraine right now?
9Sweetgum2mo
There's already a more eerie, memetic name. Slaughterbots.
Autonomous lethal weapons (ALWs; we need a more eerie, memetic name) could make the difference. Against the "realists", whereas bias is not a new problem, ALWs emphatically are. Likewise no reflexive optimism from the boosters lessens the need for sober regulation to lessen the self-evident risk of ALWs.
And this provides a "narrative through-line" for regulation - we must regulate ALWs, and so, AI systems that could design ALWs. It follows, we must regulate AI systems that design other AI systems in general, and so too, we must therefore regulate AI artifi... (read more)