cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/43768262

Some may have believed they were against AI being used for war. They just don’t want it to make the final kill decision.

The argument given by those supporting them is that AI in the military was inevitable, so their position is a reasonable one.

  • Iconoclast@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Here’s the full quote including the parts you conveniently left out.

    Even fully autonomous weapons (those that take humans out of the loop entirely and automate selecting and engaging targets) may prove critical for our national defense. But today, frontier AI systems are simply not reliable enough to power fully autonomous weapons. We will not knowingly provide a product that puts America’s warfighters and civilians at risk. We have offered to work directly with the Department of War on R&D to improve the reliability of these systems, but they have not accepted this offer.

    Our strong preference is to continue to serve the Department and our warfighters—with our two requested safeguards in place.

    Source

    • XLE@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      You said Anthropic didn’t want to develop autonomous weapons. Anthropic contradicts you. They do want to develop them.

      Can you acknowledge this fact?

      I love how Anthropic only draws the line at autonomously killing Americans, too. I guess some lives are worth more than others.

        • 0_o7@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          12 hours ago

          They’re building tools to <cull people and children> from half way across the world and you’re worried about the tone?

        • Serinus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          It’s not a very solid point. They said they may become necessary at some point, but right now they’re irresponsible.

          They’re not ruling it out in the future, but their focus is on today’s problem.

          • XLE@piefed.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 day ago

            Serinus, did you see the part where Anthropic wants to develop them with the US military?

            • Iconoclast@feddit.uk
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              5 hours ago

              with our two requested safeguards in place.

              Said safeguards being that their technology isn’t being used for mass surveillance or the development of autonomous drones. It’s explicitly mentioned in their statement - the one you’re desperately trying to massage and misquote to make it seem like they’re saying something they’re not - yet anyone can just go and read it themselves

              • XLE@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 hours ago

                Iconoclast, I see you edited your post after I replied. You did not answer whether you accept the fact that Anthropic explicitly wanted to develop fully autonomous AI alongside the Trump Department of “War.”

                Either you’re lying, or you’re the one desperately trying to reshape the truth.

              • XLE@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                5 hours ago

                Iconoclast, you have moved beyond accidental deception into intentional lies.

                Anthropic offered to work directly with the Department of “War” on R&D to improve the reliability of autonomous bombing systems.

                That’s what your link says. Do you deny this explicit fact?

                  • XLE@piefed.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    5 hours ago

                    Iconoclast, don’t be disingenuous.

                    The direct quote is “We have offered to work directly with the Department of War on R&D to improve the reliability of these systems”. “We” meaning Anthropic. “These systems” meaning fully autonomous weapons.

                    Do you acknowledge they did this? Try not to weasel out of answering with more pedantry. It’s almost as disturbing as your apparent defense of that Silicon Valley AI cult.