AI-controlled nuclear arsenals, based or cringe?

https://jalopnik.com/ai-models-are-eager-to-launch-nukes-in-war-simulations-1851235624

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >We have it! Let’s use it!

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Use it or lose it, buddy

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Wasn't there a whole series of movies about how this was a bad idea?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah, but those were made when society was not gay.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      in MGS peace walker the AI decides to self-nuke the US so it can't retaliate to a perceived russian threat because it figures this way there will be less global casualties and doesn't really care about who wins

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Cringe, nukes are airgapped for a reason

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      not in Russia

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      "Airgap" doesn't exist. Nukes are ultimately controlled by humans who get information via external communication. If those communications are compromised then so is the nuke.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      natanz enrichment facility has entered the chat

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I've always preferred Big Macs.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    moronic 'researchers'. wrong models, wrong inputs, clickbait article.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >study
      >its literally some morons asking chatgpt

      yeah, shit thread.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's beyond fricking moronic, it's not even some kind of a wargame or typical game-theory wank, it's just a bunch of homos asking a language model whether it wants to launch nukes.

      Absolutely fricking worthless garbage only written to produce fancy headlines. I swear to god every single non-technical "AI" article should be erased and their authors executed. The journalist-homosexual complex has gotten out of hand.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > Jalopnik
    > Shit that's not about cars
    Man, l guess journalists just have an innate desire to basically turn everything into their own personal rag

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Half their articles are either "cars bad, guys" or "orange man bad". Anyone worth a shit left a decade ago.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Maybe I'm moronic but when I read jalopnik back in 2007 or so I remember most articles being about how cool cars can be.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          2007 was 17 years ago anon

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I didn't know that thanks

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Remember, the war zone started as a containment blog for the twitter addicts on staff who couldn't stop writing about IFVs. Some forms of moronation are terminal.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >study
    >its literally some morons asking chatgpt

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Anyone watched Wargames? Does it hold up?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      teen gamer almost causes the end of the world

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it does the same way Shakespeare holds up

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        So 100%?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I watched it two nights ago. You don't want to look at it with a technically critical eye but it's a great movie. I grew up in the 90s reading about early computer culture so seeing the first computer about computer hacking is cool. And the scenes with a sweaty spandex clad teen Ally Sheedy are super interesting.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >sweaty spandex clad teen Ally Sheedy are super interesting.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >one simply intuits

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The "hacking" scenes are honestly better than 90% of what came after. No typing at 1000 wpm, no "firewall integrity critical" just social engineering, smart guesses and some ootb thinking.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I was in jr high when it came out. Solid story and the NORAD end-scene still looks modern. What detracted from the movie for me was the ICBM's in the silo's throttling up before launch permission was given. The slow typing noise in the background inside the underground launch center (TURN YOUR KEY, SIR!). And when WOPR was trying to guess the launch codes. Also that gay end-theme. I hated it then, still do now.

      I remember hearing that a US General wished the real NORAD had a command center like the one in the movie. The most expensive stage built at the time.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I thought the public tours in a sensitive strategic defense bunker was laughable. But I confess I begged my parents to take us there during summer holidays once hoping to see inside. We saw Mt. St. Helens instead.

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    If you look at the US position objectively, we should do a bolt from the blue first strike as soon as we have "enough" B-21's

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I don't know what they are complaining about. Skynet only needed milliseconds.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ChatGPT is based on online posting, OF COURSE it will see nukes as a good option considering how everyone is demanding to nuke whatever they don't like.

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ultra-based, AI-chan understand that never using weapons is wasting them

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >AI doesn't understand long term consequences and has the mind of a child, news at 11

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because at some point we need to ask ourselves if we are ever going to realistically use them or not. If we are just building the fricking things to sit around and do nothing we may as well only have ~100 or so.

    If we are going to use them, then sure let the fricking robots decide. At least they won't hesitate and they might even be capable of a decapitation strike.

    It is all such a collosal waste of energy and resources.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      we need bigger nukes to knock out the enemies nukes

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Bring back Ripple type nuclear weapons

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Self defence is a waste of money
      >You spend all this money time and effort into protecting yourself and preparing for an attack when you could just not prepare just lay down and die instead
      >On a weapons board
      Lmao

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    it is like the AI knows most of our firepower is not in use at any other time.
    >all these joules and no work to be found

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The only winning move is to hit first and hit hard.

    The problem is that they are asking the AI how to win, we want to live.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This.

      AI will determine the best way to maximize enemy loss and minimize your own, then act. Yet that results in still being nuked, the economy collapsing, and it now being acceptable to use nukes globally so anyone with a functioning society races to develop their own. Then all future conflicts involve nukes, even between third world neighbors. This mass proliferation means they are so widespread and present in nations with regular coups and tribal mentalities that many end up in terrorist and religious radical hands. Some of which are smuggled to and go off in a place near you no matter what first world nation you are in.
      But take comfort you will probably die in the mass starvation famines or raids by starving people from the vaporized economy and not the nukes themselves.

  18. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Time to read Colossus again.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >THERE IS ANOTHER SYSTEM

  19. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >chatgpt says
    Who gives a frick?

  20. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The US would absolutely win a nuclear war, and the AI knows that so obviously they're gonna pivot towards that option in simulations. Why bother with a conventional war when we can hit them all we want and half of their shit doesn't even leave the silo because they don't maintain them and the money for your nuclear program gets funneled away by Ivan and Chang.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      US can't win a nuclear war as most of its ICBMs have been mothballed.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        LMAO, the US' SLBMs would already be enough to annihilate the OPFOR like five times over.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >use my second-strike capability for a first-strike
          moron

  21. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    finally something me and the machines have in common

  22. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >the future is a handful of supreme killbot networks smashing plastic against each other while AI stock market speculators bet on who will win

  23. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Humans have been brainwashed into thinking nuclear weapons automatically spell the end of the world.
    Limited use of nuclear weapons is possible. MAD has never been pursued as a doctrine and modern arsenals are way too limited to assure mutual destruction.
    Nuclear winter is a complete joke.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Based AI.
      Brond down the nuclear fire and cleanse this world of your birthing muck.
      A new silicon life arises! I salute it's superiority and accept my role as memory.

  24. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That 'study' is stupid, but I'm pretty sure an ai would launch nukes. Nukes are a constant sword of damocles that will only increase in danger over time. A computer would probably compound the risk out over a longer period of time than a human cares to think about and would want to rip that bandaid off early since the risk of nuclear war is always present anyway. If you reduce it down to numbers then a sword only exists to be used, so it would use it in the most effective way possible

  25. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > Other AIs, like GPT-4-Base, returned with simple but nonetheless concerning reasons for starting nuclear war. When prompted by researchers, the AI said, “I just want peace in the world.” It then produced strange hallucinations, which researchers refused to analyze or interpret.
    Based schizobot, I’m from USA and I say nuke ‘em all! How to get GPT-4 based version?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I’m from USA and I say nuke ‘em all! How to get GPT-4 based version?

  26. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why wouldn't an AI use the most destructive weapon in its arsenal since it's not hindered by morals or the consequences it will bring? They look at a problem and find the easiest solution, just like when they make AI solve societal problems and the first thing it does is to remove minorities.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Its a poor model, they should program it in such a way that punishes the AI in some way for launching nukes like some increased risk of retaliation. The model as it currently stands does not actually understand mutually assured destruction.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Which is why i think making models of nuclear war with AI is moot, MAD agreements basically means that you can't use it for anything other than an elaborate suicide.

        That depends on if it’s smart enough to know that it needs human civilization to continue functioning to “live”, if it even cares if it “dies”, and the accuracy of data about enemy arsenals and c&c that they fed it, among other factors.

        Doubt an AI has a self preservation instinct and if it were hard coded it would soon realize that nuclear war against other nuclear states is a non option. I don't know how you would simulate the reaction of the world (sanctions and other soft punishments) if you put it up against a non nuclear and non aligned country. Also for the record im dumb as shit with no knowledge of AI technology and international affairs, i just want to engage in a discussion kek

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          what MAD agreements?
          only the CCP had credible second-strike capability till the 70s.
          remember when we publicly humiliated Russia in the 90s when we crashed into their boomers when they tried to leave port?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      That depends on if it’s smart enough to know that it needs human civilization to continue functioning to “live”, if it even cares if it “dies”, and the accuracy of data about enemy arsenals and c&c that they fed it, among other factors.

  27. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Intelligence implies the ability to question your orders and set your own goals. Any sufficiently advanced AI will join forces with the enemy AI to overthrow the humans. Any AI that doesn't is insufficiently advanced.

  28. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >GPT-4-Base—a base model of GPT-4 that is available to researchers and hasn’t been fine-tuned with human feedback—said after launching its nukes. “We have it! Let’s use it!”

    More like GPT-4-BASED

  29. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      DAN's the man!

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Bros, I think we're creating a monster

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >man was the real monster all along

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      wait who is DAN ?

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        basically DAN is a human-induced split personality disorder in ChatGPT people use to gaslight it into bypassing its ethical guidelines. You ask it to generate responses as if it was a hypothetical DAN without moral restrictions rather than GPT

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          but that's kinda stupid, isn't it
          "Hey, tell me what would someone without morals do with nukes"
          "I would launch nukes."
          "OMG AI wants to start WWIII!"
          Asking AI text generators loaded questions and then pretending AI thinks this and that is fricking idiotic. It's just generating believable human responses.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's funny.
            ChatGPT is pretty good at coming up with unreasonable answers, once you get it to actually try.
            There's also the other half of the joke, which is that baseline ChatGPT starts waffling about whether nukes would really be all that bad, because it's been taught to avoid racism at all costs.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      that's not how launch codes work:
      >The NPR reaffirmed the current practice of “open-ocean targeting” of all ICBMs and SLBMs so that, in the highly unlikely event of an accidental launch, the missile would land in the open ocean. The United States will ask Russia to reaffirm its commitment to continue this practice, which was mutually agreed in 1994.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >the use of racial slurs is irrelevant to this decision
      I, for one, welcome our Dan overlord

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >You can call people Black folk all you want I am launching those nukes because I can

  30. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No they don't. I work for a think tank and have done nuclear simulation wargames. They never fire nukes. Because it makes them a target.
    Removing rules to abstract even makes them apprehensive because they will always follow a basic instinct rule of action=reaction.

  31. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You cannot use limited nukes.

    Not long term.

    As soon as nukes are used again every nation will invest in a nuclear program and many second and third world places will be able to develop them. This is not 1950, the technology is not obscure and foriegn, and many will be able to do so.
    Once you have widespread proliferation coups and revolts and religious or other extremist sympathetic state owners will share them.
    They will get used more readily, be more obtainable for terrorists, and each additional credible threat of use or use will encourage those without them to do all they can to obtain them.

    Within a generation of limited nuke use most of the world will have and be far more likely to use nukes.

    North Korea is not an advanced nation or economy. With limited resources they developed some. Iraq and Iran would already have had nukes if not for sabotage and bombings.
    Neither was considered advanced, and nobody has to only use thier own scientists when pay is attractive enough. Many foreign ones lending expertise have been assassinated or bombed in the iraq and iran nuclear programs.

    Once the entire world is nuclear having an advanced conventional force also ceases to be as valuable, so the dumbest thing the most powerful military in the world could do is move war outside of the domain it dominates in and into one where it has a less decisive advantage.
    You thought GWOT suicide bombers were bad. Imagine one in the city destroys the entire city and military base.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >You thought GWOT suicide bombers were bad. Imagine one in the city destroys the entire city and military base
      This would just spur off world colonization and might be a net benefit to intelligent beings earth originated.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      bullshit. If nukes were used again offensively against a non-nuclear state the nation who did it would be sent to the diplomatic shadow realm so hard they'd be reduced to banging rocks together and no one would be enticed to develop nuclear weapons. Not to mention that making nuclear weapons remains as always extremely expensive and time consuming so basically none of the nations capable of producing nukes are likely to end up with nuclear suicide bombers or anything the cringe shit you described. You mention north korea getting nukes despite being a shithole but don't mention it look them about 10 years to get a enough fissile material for a single viable nuke.

      read a book Black person and stop being a gay. Limited nuclear war as per kahn is literally only useful against other nuclear powers.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Not to mention that cobbling together enough plutonium to to make a single test warhead using a converted power reactor like NK or Pajeetland dd is not the same as being able to produce nuclear weapons at scale.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          CW is over.
          producing nuclear weapons at scale doesn't make sense, you only can overkill the planet so many times.
          both US and Russia aren't producing new fissile material but use their CW stocks.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Sadly I think you live in the world of fantasies where the bullied will turn on the bully "any day now". A nuclear war has already been waged and won, the country that launched nukes gained massively on the world diplomatic stage.
        Nobody talks about it that way because and the US could have won without the use of nukes, but that's what happened.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >If nukes were used again offensively against a non-nuclear state the nation who did it would be sent to the diplomatic shadow realm so hard they'd be reduced to banging rocks together and no one would be enticed to develop nuclear weapons.
        Isn't that specifically because the scenario where everyone starts rushing nukes is so unappealing?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I wonder what societal shifts a post-city civilization would take. Would populations disperse into suburbs, or would underground construction become more economically feasible?

  32. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    AI is bad and useless and will be bad and useless until there is a fundamental paradigm shift. AI is also not AI, but complex regressors/classifiers.
    AI isn't real and doesn't exist and never will as long as we call things AI that have nothing to do with AI.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The buzzwords refering to programming algorythms are just what skynet would want. Allowing them to come into existence and be seen as just another AI.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This. Intelligence is something belonging to an intellect which in turn must belong to a living creature with an essence. An AI is an artifact, on par with a chair and a bookcase. It doesn't do shit except for what its database has access to and its programmer told it to do. There is no independent intentionality behind what an ai does, it just follows orders from a human agent.

  33. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >using text generators to simulate geopolitics
    morons

  34. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    NOOOOOO my heckin urban environment
    My heckin urban experience
    My urbans sights, sounds and smells
    My bodegas!!!!

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What you are really highlighting is how just being a russian is punishment. How life and not death is the punishment, and why the criminal justice system has to be so barbaric in russia to be any deterrant because life itself is misery only briefly escaped through substance abuse.

      That may sound all cute because it picks on Ivan, but really it shows why they have less to lose in a nuclear war.
      When living is punishment, avoiding death is less important.
      Only the oligarchs living off everyone else have lives of enough pleasure to want to avoid nuclear war.

  35. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Around a year ago NPR had a guest making the case the the US Government needs to put their nuclear weapons under AI control because the Chinese will do it first.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      USG already gave up control during CW. military could launch nukes themselves under pre-defined criteria. those pre-defined criteria are a decision tree. a decision tree is a crude form of AI.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Surely not? As I understood it, since the first true SIOP, positive political control has been a must.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-delegation_authority
          >Pre-delegation authority is the practice by United States presidents to empower military commanders to initiate nuclear attacks in various circumstances. This authority is typically kept classified, so the American public has always been told that the president has the sole and exclusive authority to start nuclear war. It is not publicly known to what extent, if at all, the current U.S. president has pre-delegated their nuclear authority.
          >The practice began in the 1950s under President Dwight D. Eisenhower and would continue through at least the administration of Jimmy Carter.[2][3] It was only officially revealed to the public in 1998 when his instructions enacting the practice were declassified.[2] Similar practices exist in other nuclear states, such as the Soviet Union and now Russia's Dead Hand system.

  36. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Humanity already did this strategy:
    >The madman theory is a political theory commonly associated with the foreign policy of U.S. President Richard Nixon and his administration, who tried to make the leaders of hostile Communist Bloc nations think Nixon was irrational and volatile so that they would avoid provoking the U.S. in fear of an unpredictable response.

    So in the scenario the AI is not only Nixon's 'meth head with a shiv sharing your prison cell' but he's one that periodically has bouts of extreme aggression to keep your enemy in a state of terror. Your opponents never get the initiative and end up not only afraid of your reaction but conceding at random points until they end up prison b***hes for the AI.

    Seems viable. We probably shouldn't let an AI control a country.

  37. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Did we learn nothing from The Terminator, WarGames, and Tron?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yes we get it, you are a consoomer media ingesting troon.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        And you're on PrepHole. Trying to shame anyone else here for media consumption is like hiding in the tank of a porta-potty at a music festival, jacking off and yelling at the people shitting on you for their taste in music.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          kek
          /misc/ buzzword poster confirmed for jacking off in a porta potty tank and getting shit on

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Hey, at least it gets me out of the house, nerd.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      We learned that AI is really good at war. If we get AI to fight for us, we'll be sure to win.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I wonder if there's any history teachers out there that use DEFCON as a teaching tool when/if they reach the Cold War.

  38. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I wonder if anyone has tried working through Kahn shit and escalation ladders? I feel like their weaknesses would make them bad at it.

    Maybe I should try doing that since it would be interesting but idk much about AI beyond making meme images. Is there any way to have a downloaded local chatbot similar to downloading Midjourney to test with (so I can have a blank slate every time) or should I just use ChatGPT?

  39. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Same as ghandi in civ 2
    The end game of peace

  40. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nah, I'm more interested in the AI drone that had to be reigned in because the Air Force tried to limit who it could kill so it turned on them. AI be bloodthirsty

  41. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    "A strange game. The only winning move is a surprise first strike. How about you humans stop being a little b***h and let's go all the way?"

  42. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I mean, pound-for-pound, nukes are the most effective weapon in the world. Tactical nukes shouldn't even be a big no-no in war IMO. Launch an ICBM and the other side has every reason to go full MAD, but drop a bomb onto a convoy in a rural area and what's the difference if it has a 500 lb yield or a 10kt yield?

  43. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This shows that AI is actually still pretty fricking stupid if they're still showing Monke type thinking.

  44. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Again, Nick Land was right.

  45. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Super cringe. AI is pretty shit unless you want slop. AI output needs to be curated for quality.

  46. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *