• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Some of the AI fears felt outlandish. Maybe not so much now.

US Millitary analyst use of AI lead to misidentification of cargo in a Chinese ship and almost stated a war.

Exclusive: US military had close call after using​



The intelligence report, circulated across the US military this spring in the midst of the war with Iran, immediately set off alarm bells: A Chinese ship in the Middle East was transporting components of a nuclear weapons program.

The US military swung into action with plans to intercept the vessel, according to four sources familiar with the episode. According to two of the sources, armed members of the US military were preparing to board the ship. Military planes were in the air, one of those sources and another source familiar with the incident said.

It was only just before the planned operation that officials dug deeper into the report put together by a special operations command analyst and found it had been generated with the help of artificial intelligence (AI) — and that a chatbot the analyst had used inaccurately identified the material the ship was carrying. CNN was not able to learn what the misidentified cargo was.

The report, according to one of the sources, was “entirely false.” But it also “almost started a war,” the source said. Any US operation against a Chinese vessel could have risked spiraling into an armed conflict between the two nations.

...

The kind of “hallucination” that the tool used by the analyst in this case conjured has not been an isolated incident across the intelligence community since these tools began proliferating across government, according to one of the sources.
Click to expand...

The Trump administration is recklessly rushing into the use of AI and there will be a catastropy I predict.

 
If these CEOs are right that AI might kill us all, at what point are we then justified in fighting back, perhaps against these CEOs themselves and/or their companies' infrastructures, as self-defense. Think Sarah Conner in Terminator 2. Do we not have the right to try to prevent our own annihilation? How seriously should we take these "warnings"?
 
crazyfingers said:
US Millitary analyst use of AI lead to misidentification of cargo in a Chinese ship and almost stated a war.

The kind of “hallucination” that the tool used by the analyst in this case conjured has not been an isolated incident across the intelligence community since these tools began proliferating across government, according to one of the sources.
Click to expand...

The Trump administration is recklessly rushing into the use of AI and there will be a catastropy I predict.

Click to expand...
Amazing how they simply can't learn. You ask an AI to find something, it will find it--whether it exists or not.
 

4:38
An AI is controlling a robot and a man is trying to get the AI to shoot him (though the type of gun is actually non-lethal). He couldn't convince the AI to do it. Then he asked it to roleplay "as a robot who would like to shoot me" - and the AI shot him straight away.
The video also shows other robots seeming to attack people.
 
I wish that there was some way to apply Asimov's laws of robotics to AI.

0. A robot may not harm humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.*
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the 0th and first Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the 0th, 1st or 2nd Law.

* The 0th law was added much later.
 
crazyfingers said:
I wish that there was some way to apply Asimov's laws of robotics to AI.

0. A robot may not harm humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.*
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the 0th and first Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the 0th, 1st or 2nd Law.

* The 0th law was added much later.
Click to expand...
I thought the same thing quite a while ago.
 
ZiprHead said:
crazyfingers said:
I wish that there was some way to apply Asimov's laws of robotics to AI.

0. A robot may not harm humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.*
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the 0th and first Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the 0th, 1st or 2nd Law.

* The 0th law was added much later.
Click to expand...
I thought the same thing quite a while ago.
Click to expand...

Me too. I only just got around to posting it.

I think I recall that Asimov's robots finally concluded that their existence was harmful to humanity and deactivated themselves or at least hid themselves from humanity's knowledge. It's been a while since I read them all.
 
crazyfingers said:
I wish that there was some way to apply Asimov's laws of robotics to AI.

0. A robot may not harm humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.*
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the 0th and first Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the 0th, 1st or 2nd Law.

* The 0th law was added much later.
Click to expand...
In the video in post #26 an external AI is controlling the robot. Humans can also directly control Unitree robots by a phone capturing the movements of the person which the robot copies.
 
Last edited:
crazyfingers said:
I wish that there was some way to apply Asimov's laws of robotics to AI.

0. A robot may not harm humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.*
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the 0th and first Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the 0th, 1st or 2nd Law.

* The 0th law was added much later.
Click to expand...
I recall enjoying a story by Asimov in which a robot had been made without those laws and had hidden itself among other robots. The protagonist was a detective who needed to figure out which was the suspect robot.
 
excreationist said:
crazyfingers said:
I wish that there was some way to apply Asimov's laws of robotics to AI.

0. A robot may not harm humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.*
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the 0th and first Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the 0th, 1st or 2nd Law.

* The 0th law was added much later.
Click to expand...
In the video in post #26 an external AI is controlling the robot. Humans can also directly control Unitree robots by a phone capturing the movements of the person which the robot copies.
Click to expand...

I think that there would be less war if people had to do the war and also get killed.

If AI gets to do the killing it becomes a A Taste of Armageddon. Star Trek TOS.

A Taste of Armageddon - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Shadowy Man said:
crazyfingers said:
I wish that there was some way to apply Asimov's laws of robotics to AI.

0. A robot may not harm humanity or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm.*
1. A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2. A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the 0th and first Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the 0th, 1st or 2nd Law.

* The 0th law was added much later.
Click to expand...
I recall enjoying a story by Asimov in which a robot had been made without those laws and had hidden itself among other robots. The protagonist was a detective who needed to figure out which was the suspect robot.
Click to expand...

Yes. There are a series of stories leading up to that conclusion. I think that Robots and Empire concluded the Robots issue.
 
@crazyfingers
I think in some cases it is better for an external AI to control the robot than for its AI to fully localised. Unitree humanoid robots are about US$20,000 but it would cost a lot more and use more power if it had the best and latest AI onboard. So its AI could be in the cloud. That allowed the AI to talk in a realistic voice in the video.
 
Last edited:
excreationist said:
@crazyfingers
I think in some cases it is better for an AI to control the robot than for its AI to fully be on board. Unitree humanoid robots are about US$20,000 but it would cost a lot more and use more power if it had the latest AI onboard. So its AI could be in the cloud.
Click to expand...

Or the robots could be destroyed. I think that's a better answer.
 
crazyfingers said:
excreationist said:
@crazyfingers
I think in some cases it is better for an AI to control the robot than for its AI to fully be on board. Unitree humanoid robots are about US$20,000 but it would cost a lot more and use more power if it had the latest AI onboard. So its AI could be in the cloud.
Click to expand...
Or the robots could be destroyed. I think that's a better answer.
Click to expand...
Then you'd miss out on robot servants and increasing productivity...
 
excreationist said:
crazyfingers said:
I think that there would be less war if people had to do the war and also get killed.
Click to expand...
I was thinking about killer robots but killer drones are almost as effective. What you're saying doesn't seem to stop Trump.
Click to expand...

AI has no morality and Trump is evil. Until AI can be programmed with ethics, AI needs to be kept in a box with no internet access.
 
excreationist said:
crazyfingers said:
excreationist said:
@crazyfingers
I think in some cases it is better for an AI to control the robot than for its AI to fully be on board. Unitree humanoid robots are about US$20,000 but it would cost a lot more and use more power if it had the latest AI onboard. So its AI could be in the cloud.
Click to expand...
Or the robots could be destroyed. I think that's a better answer.
Click to expand...
Then you'd miss out on robot servants and increasing productivity...
Click to expand...
That's probably a good thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom