MS workers protest bid to build Pentagon's $10bn AI warfare system

How long do you want to keep protecting our allies?

Trump mentioned closing bases, pulling troops out of Korea and cancelling joint exercises and the left went bonkers over that.

So excuse me if you sound very hypocritical right now.

 

”I” sound hypocritical? The left doesn’t represent me so unless you can pull out a quote of mine where I have ever advocated or been against what you mentioned you can retract your statement.

Our number of bases do seem... excessive... however.

 

‘Them’ are as busy researching and designing autonomous drone swarms as the US. Both sides are totally insane.

 

Well there are certainly many areas we can cut spending on but the ultimate problem is that we are separated by two oceans from most of the world.

In order for us to maintain power militarily its going to cost us a helluva lot more money.

Its not cheap to move our forces across an ocean and we need to be prepared for that.

We also want to provide our troops with the best equipment possible and that's also extremely expensive but something I don't think you would want to change.

Pulling us out of NATO would be another very good move.

They don't need us there, if for some reason they do then they can ask us and I'm sure we'd be right there but we don't need to babysit Europe at this point.

 

Actually I never said I did to be accurate. However, you are correct, I don't support fascist and unconstitutional legislation, I suppose you do.

Once again making false claims about me. Please quote where I posted that red herring of yours.

I'm guessing you're ok that the White House and the US military did nothing to prevent or stop 9/11, I'm not. Especially given this is the best equipped, most expensive and sophisticated military/intelligence apparatus second to none on the planet. And even more importantly that they had advance warning.

Their job.

Too late, 9/11 happened thanks to the Bush administration and the US military's lack of effort to do anything and worse, to make sure they could do nothing. History cannot be rewritten.

Absolute nonsense. To you the US government does not commit war crimes, including genocide and other human rights atrocities and does not make every effort to circumvent the Constitution to violate those constitutionally protected rights 24/7. Here's the reality, not lalaland.

Where do you invent all these red herrings from? Do you believe it supports your apologist mentality? I had a 40+ year career in computer software consulting, not once did I design any system or write a single program that had anything to do with genocide or any other human rights atrocities.

 

What do you propose they should have done with this advance warning? Stop saying that is the military's job. Surely, you must have some ideas given your repeated insistence that the military should have done something?

 

When they didn't lift one finger to try and did everything possible to make sure it went to perfection, there was no way, you're absolutely correct.

That's incorrect, I proposed that they should have done the job they were mandated by the Constitution and paid $trillions to do.

There were only 4 according to legend, not one hundred or a thousand. If the crackerjack $trillion US military/intelligence apparatus cannot stop 4 alleged hijackings by a few men using box cutters, what is their purpose then? To rob every American taxpayer under pretense of protection? That's what organized crime does.

You're making silly excuses. Are you being paid by the military to be an apologist or do you just do it because you believe they are as incompetent as you want them to be?

Correct, there is a leadership system that begins at the top, the Commander-in-Chief. Good thing you figured that out at the very least.

 

Why? Do you believe it's MY job to explain what they should have done? When they pay me over $1/2 trillion each and every year, I promise I will come up with a plan to the best of my limited expertise. Until then it is THEIR job, not mine.

Absolutely, I already said they should have done THEIR job that they were highly trained and very well paid to do. Was there something you didn't understand about that? Doing NOTHING was not an option within their job description.

 

They have done precisely the job they have been mandated by the Constitution and paid $trillions to do.

 

They didn't prevent or stop 9/11 and there is nothing in the Constitution that gives the US government any authority to commit genocide and other human rights atrocities. In fact, the Constitution prohibits such crimes in several ways. If you believe that is their job, you know nothing about the Constitution. Worse, you are complicit by your approval.

 

That is not an answer. I will give you a list of possible actions. Tell me which ones you think are legal, effective and a good idea:
1) Shut down all airline activity in the US until they could figure out what is going on.
2) Shoot down any airliner which acts suspiciously.
3) Do not allow anyone from the middle east to board one of our airplanes. Of course, shoot them if necessary.
4) Post guards in the terminals. Arrest anyone who looks like they might be from the middle east. Of course, shoot them if necessary.
5) Post guards at our borders and ports of entry and do not let anyone from the middle east to enter our country. Of course, shoot them if necessary.

I can't think of anything else.

 

You keep complaining about other people putting words in your mouth. Where did I say I approved of genocide?

 

Bob0627 wrote "Where do you invent all these red herrings from? Do you believe it supports your apologist mentality? I had a 40+ year career in computer software consulting, not once did I design any system or write a single program that had anything to do with genocide or any other human rights atrocities.”
Maybe you never consciously wrote code or system with anything to do with genocide but if you’ve ever written a genetic algorithm it could later on be included in a weaponised autonomous military application. All such software needs to be very, very carefully thought about unless as a species we’re all happy to see artificial intelligence evolve into something that’s a real threat to our existence. OK, that’s a simplification of a huge issue but I suspect it’s too late anyhow to stop such systems becoming self generating, self perpetuating plagues on us all.

 

It's the only logically correct answer I can give. If you don't like the answer, don't ask the question.

That's because you're in no position to do so. No one is paying you more than $1/2 trillion each and every year to come up with any suggestions or the right answer and you are not qualified for that job, same as me. This line of discussion on your part is as silly as it gets. Think about it, an anonymous poster in a mostly anonymous discussion forum asking another anonymous poster to come up with answers for the proper defense of the US that is the job of the US military/intelligence apparatus. It would be laughable if it wasn't so pathetic.

 

My line of expertise was designing and implementing commercial software systems mostly for large international and domestic corporations, not military or scientific systems. I did begin my college years as an engineering major so I have written simple programs for engineering applications back in the day but I've never written a genetic algorithm of any kind (I'm not quite sure what you mean by that). Unless that was a typo and you really meant a generic algorithm. But that could be just about anything under the sun.

Come to think of it I did once write a program having to do with blood types as a personal experiment that did involve gene pools. But that was strictly for my own very specific purpose, no one had access to my code. But I doubt that's what you meant.

Agreed. Were all those who participated in the Manhattan Project aware of the potential consequences? I doubt too many were.

 

You didn't, you implied they did that (the "job") by your fallacious claim since that "job" entailed committing genocide and other human rights atrocities (that you deny of course):

 

https://scholar.google.com.au/schol...lications&hl=en&as_sdt=0&as_vis=1&oi=scholart

Several scientists who worked on the Manhattan Project were well aware of what they were about to unleash and attempted to stop the project.
They were gagged at the time ‘for security reasons’. Even Einstein commented “My God, what have we unleashed” or words to that effect - I can’t find the exact quotation.

 

Your comments are so insane that they are not worth commenting on.

 

You are complicit of human rights atrocities because computer software has been used to commit genocide. That you deny, of course.

 

Now that you really meant genetic, my program had nothing to do with developing genetic algorithms and was only available to me for my own purposes.

Agreed, I did imply some were well aware but certainly not all.

 

Yet you keep commenting on them. Your insistence that I solve problems that is the domain of the US military and detail the solution in a discussion forum is not exactly intellectually sound either (to be polite).

I am not a piece of computer software so I have no complicity. Also, I've never denied that software has been used as a tool to commit genocide (e.g. drone technology), yet another false claim. You're also saying a pencil is complicit as well because it has been used to draw up military plans in the past that eventually led to the commission of genocide. You make no sense.

 

You say I am complicit without any knowledge whatsoever what I did in the military. You are just as complicit as I am. Probably more.

 

It has nothing to do with what you did in the military (unless you were directly or indirectly involved), it has to do with your consent via your denial and apologist position that you portray in this very forum.

How so? By my vehement and very vocal objection?

 

You complain the military did nothing to stop the 9/11 hijackers even though you can't say what they had at hand to do so.
Then you complain about measures taken to stop such accounts.
Now you complain about new technology that could enhanced our efforts.

Can you choose just one side of your mouth to talk out of?

 

So which is it? Is AI inherently bad and MS/Google et al stop developing it? Clearly, both MS and Google are actively selling on the basis of machine learning value to product. Why should either MS/Google be able to excuse themselves from the defense of the nation that they suck life from?