Exactly two weeks after Russia invaded Ukraine in February, Alexander Karp, the CEO of data analytics company Palantir, made his pitch to European leaders. With war on their doorstep, Europeans ought to modernize their arsenals with Silicon Valley's help, he argued in an open letter.
[...] Militaries are responding to the call. NATO announced on June 30 that it is creating a $1 billion innovation fund that will invest in early-stage startups and venture capital funds developing "priority" technologies such as artificial intelligence, big-data processing, and automation.
[...] The relationship between tech and the military wasn't always so amicable. In 2018, following employee protests and outrage, Google pulled out of the Pentagon's Project Maven, an attempt to build image recognition systems to improve drone strikes.The episode caused heated debate about human rights and the morality of developing AI for autonomous weapons.
[...] But four years later, Silicon Valley is closer to the world's militaries than ever. And it's not just big companies, either—startups are finally getting a look in, says Yll Bajraktari, who was previously executive director of the US National Security Commission on AI (NSCAI) and now works for the Special Competitive Studies Project, a group that lobbies for more adoption of AI across the US.
In a piece for Prospect magazine co-written with Lucy Suchman, a sociology professor at Lancaster University, she argued that AI boosters are stoking Cold War rhetoric and trying to create a narrative that positions Big Tech as "critical national infrastructure," too big and important to break up or regulate. They warn that AI adoption by the military is being presented as an inevitability rather than what it really is: an active choice that involves ethical complexities and trade-offs.
[...] Despite the steady march of AI into the field of battle, the ethical concerns that prompted the protests around Project Maven haven't gone away.
There have been some efforts to assuage those concerns. Aware it has a trust issue, the US Department of Defense has rolled out "responsible artificial intelligence" guidelines for AI developers, and it has its own ethical guidelines for the use of AI. NATO has an AI strategy that sets out voluntary ethical guidelines for its member nations.
[...] One of their key concepts is that humans must always retain control of AI systems. But as the technology develops, that won't really be possible, says Payne.
"The whole point of an autonomous [system] is to allow it to make a decision faster and more accurately than a human could do and at a scale that a human can't do," he says. "You're effectively hamstringing yourself if you say 'No, we're going to lawyer each and every decision.'"
[...] Ultimately, the new era of military AI raises a slew of difficult ethical questions that we don't have answers to yet.
One of those questions is how automated we want armed forces to be in the first place, says Payne. On one hand, AI systems might reduce casualties by making war more targeted, but on the other, you're "effectively creating a robot mercenary force to fight on your behalf," he says. "It distances your society from the consequences of violence."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 11 2022, @07:02PM (9 children)
Came out of nowhere, we need to prevent this in the future and spend all that is needed to do it:
https://www.salon.com/2022/06/30/nato-and-the-ukraine-war-it-took-30-years-for-and-the-west-to-create-this-disaster/ [salon.com]
Or we could use that money and spend it on stopping global warming, which will soon become apparent as the bigger threat.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by khallow on Monday July 11 2022, @07:35PM (7 children)
This is a classic fusion of fallacy of composition and blame deflection. It's quite clear that Russia is the sole actor responsible for "this disaster". The phony concern over broken promises about NATO are ridiculous because they ignore two important points. First, that NATO has never in its entire existence acted against Russia militarily. Even now, it's western governments choosing to ship military hardware and such, not NATO acting against Russia directly. Second, Russia has just given a sound demonstration that the reason for NATO's existence is justified - as well as the actions of the past three decades! There would be no Ukraine war without Russia's duplicity.
And that brings me to the ridiculous bias of such arguments. If it's concerning that NATO supposedly violated some agreement not to expand to Russia's border, then why isn't it similarly concerning when Russia blatantly violated real treaty obligations by invading Ukraine back in 2014? Why should we take this silly blame redirection seriously?
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday July 11 2022, @07:46PM (4 children)
Just because everyone didn't react to 2014 Crimea doesn't mean we shouldn't overreact to 2022 Ukraine now.
How often should I have my memory checked? I used to know but...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday July 11 2022, @07:53PM (3 children)
What is an appropriate level of reaction to the Ukraine invasion of 2022 and why is what we're doing now too much?
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday July 11 2022, @08:01PM (2 children)
I don't think we are overreacting. But maybe we should -- a little bit.
An appropriate level of reaction, IMO, is anything that brings this to a sudden end and ensures it won't happen again.
Just like almost a hundred years ago.
How often should I have my memory checked? I used to know but...
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Tuesday July 12 2022, @02:46PM (1 child)
So, we should nuke them? Start World War III? Or do you think China would sit idly by, if we attacked Russia? They might. Let's avoid WWIII, if we can, though. Thanks . . .
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday July 12 2022, @05:26PM
I never brought up nukes.
How often should I have my memory checked? I used to know but...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 11 2022, @07:59PM (1 child)
Why indeed!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday July 11 2022, @08:45PM
(Score: 5, Touché) by Frosty Piss on Monday July 11 2022, @09:06PM
It *did not* “come out of nowhere”. After Crimea, it was obvious to everyone that he wanted the whole thing. He even gave public speeches about Ukraine being Russian. And then he took *several weeks* to mass his army on the boarder. “Came out of nowhere”? Where ever do you get that?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by DannyB on Monday July 11 2022, @07:57PM (5 children)
Bipedal or quadripedal soldier robots that can recognize Russian mechanized military vehicles and troops. Possibly using an IFF system. (identification fiend or foe)
Swarms of AI Flying drones that are loosely controlled by a remote 'pilot'.
If YOU are invaded by Russia in an unprovoked attack which destroys your cities, creates massive refugees of your population, and pretty much ends your way of life as you knew it . . . then isn't this justified to end the invasion?
If YOUR city were turned into a pile of rubble in an unprovoked attack, and your family had to flee for their lives with very little possessions, leaving your pets behind; if YOUR way of life were destroyed and likely would not go back to how it was in your lifetime; you might feel differently.
I'm not suggesting we should use AI weapons against the civilians of the invading country. But against their military, yes.
Or maybe if it happens to us, we should just let them roll right over us. Do you think Russia will stop at Crimea? At Ukraine? At any other EU countries? Once Putin takes all of Europe, do you not think he might set his sights on us here in the USA? And we should not bring to bear any and everything to stop this?
How often should I have my memory checked? I used to know but...
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday July 11 2022, @08:49PM (4 children)
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday July 11 2022, @10:40PM (3 children)
Yes, tools can be used for evil as well as good. A laptop computer for example can be used as a weapon. Just ask anyone who has been hit over the head with a laptop. So should we do away with laptop computers?
It would be nice to keep unjust wars and other crimes from happening. But if they happen, we should just let it happen, because, oh well. It's sad and too bad. We can't do anything in response. Uh, NO! We should use what we can to end this and deter it from happening in the future. Otherwise they will be coming for us eventually.
How often should I have my memory checked? I used to know but...
(Score: 2, Interesting) by khallow on Tuesday July 12 2022, @02:46AM (2 children)
Not everything is as innocuous as a laptop.
What would happen if Russia were the greatly, technologically advanced power? A few tens of thousands of Ukrainian deaths and another stepping stone for the Russians. It's only a considerable Russian failure that allowed the rest of the world a chance to stop this.
The next someone does this, they might not be so sloppy and the invasion might be a lot more one-sided.
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Tuesday July 12 2022, @02:52PM (1 child)
Perhaps to a certain degree, but winning battles doesn't mean you will win the war. Just look at Korea and Vietnam. Sure, the USA was militarily superior. That doesn't mean, that you can "just win". There is no "win button" for a war.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 12 2022, @11:42PM
There are plenty of one-sided wars whether or not that is true.