Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday May 31 2018, @07:42AM   Printer-friendly
from the Don't-be-Evil? dept.

Google promises ethical principles to guide development of military AI

Google is drawing up a set of guidelines that will steer its involvement in developing AI tools for the military, according to a report from The New York Times. What exactly these guidelines will stipulate isn't clear, but Google says they will include a ban on the use of artificial intelligence in weaponry. The principles are expected to be announced in full in the coming weeks. They are a response to the controversy over the company's decision to develop AI tools for the Pentagon that analyze drone surveillance footage.

[...] But the question facing these employees (and Google itself) is: where do you draw the line? Does using machine learning to analyze surveillance footage for the military count as "weaponized AI"? Probably not. But what if that analysis informs future decisions about drone strikes? Does it matter then? How would Google even know if this had happened?

Also at VentureBeat and Engadget.

Previously: Google vs Maven
Google Employees on Pentagon AI Algorithms: "Google Should Not be in the Business of War"
About a Dozen Google Employees Have Resigned Over Project Maven


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Hartree on Thursday May 31 2018, @10:11PM (1 child)

    by Hartree (195) on Thursday May 31 2018, @10:11PM (#686953)

    This code has no such effect in this case. Section 406 deals with complying with US law. It doesn't say anything about military contracting or weaponized AI development for the US government, both of which are legal (whether or not someone thinks it should be).

    From Section 406:
    "This Code has been adopted for the purpose of promoting:

    honest and ethical conduct, including the ethical handling of actual or apparent conflicts of interest between personal and professional relationships;

    full, fair, accurate, timely and understandable disclosure in reports and documents that a Fund files with, or submits to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and in other public communications made by a Fund;

    compliance with applicable laws and governmental rules and regulations;

    the prompt internal reporting of violations of the Code to an appropriate person or persons identified in the Code; and

    accountability for adherence to the Code. "

    Has nada about this issue.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 1, Offtopic) by aristarchus on Thursday May 31 2018, @11:41PM

    by aristarchus (2645) on Thursday May 31 2018, @11:41PM (#686986) Journal

    Are you sure, or are you just saying this, so that you have something to say? What was the question, again?