I admire that the AI developers have stuck to the “we won’t let our AI kill people” values to this point, but to me it seems highly unlikely that those safeguards will stay in place for any lengthy period of time when they’ve already chosen to get in bed with the military industrial complex.

Honestly, at least one military that is very interested in speeding "kill chain" with AI explicitly tells you that a critical requirement is that ultimate decision (and responsibility) has to fall on a human. Partially because a human can take responsibility, as in the old IBM "computer can't take management decision" slide.

Same discussion included a suggestion that the articles from last year about AI targeting might have been explicitly nudged by said AI's creators to judge attitudes for fully automated killing. While specifying that, at least currently, the specific military and most of its allies keeps the stance of human-in-the-loop.

As an AI developer who does do work with the Pentagon, I don't know anyone amongst my colleagues who doesn't roll their eyes at this ridiculous notion that somehow extracting infinite wealth for the world's richest men isn't just killing people with extra steps. Just because there is more distance between working at Facebook and bombs doesn't mean they aren't still inextricably linked. The idea that anyone can honestly believe "our AI doesn't kill people" is a fantasy. Even serious scientists are already using commercial AI to generate new fentanyl analogues:

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12539-024-00623-0

All the AI was always going to be used to kill people all along. Some of us are just more honest about that reality.

That is certainly a novel form of whataboutism. Spooky murder at a distance through nonspecific actions too.

US health insurance industry explicitly delivered harm through "AI", though.

The ethical route of making the AI having options of "accept" and "refer to human" an insurance claim probably provided less ROI :V

It puts the tech world on notice that you can profit off monopoly power for 20 years before the DOJ will make any attempt to shut down your party.

Glad we can listen to one propaganda machine, NYT, talk about the media empire of a different propagandist, Murdoch

The NYT stole his playbook of constant fear mongering and division. I'm not sure they have the standing to criticize it without looking hypocritical. Ads don't click themselves I suppose.

Whew I hope this isn’t permanent. I was just starting really like using Echofon to digest my twitter feed. Somehow I have a much more positive experience when I’m not being constantly suggested inflammatory tweets by people I don’t follow and third party apps allowed me what felt like more control there.

Really sad to hear about Ken’s passing. Athletes like him and Travis Pastrana will always have been a big part of my youth.

That said, Snowmobiles and ATVs continue to stay firmly in the “no thanks I’m good” category for me.

I believe it was only earlier last year that the Diesel Brothers/Cleetus McFarland had a near-death experience with a snowmobile. Really brought awareness to how dangerous those vehicles can become.

Yep. As fun as they look, there are three people in my personal life that are varying levels of disabled due to ATV accidents.

The feeling when self awareness blows into the forum like a refreshing breeze

Great question! Writing and producing electronic music, continuing to explore and develop that perfect analog/digital setup, DJing loud dance music for anyone who will listen, and probably continuing to explore the intersection of electronic music and neuroscience (I.e. what’s happening to your brain when you rock up with 10k other folks to all focus on and experience the same show).

That site is a mobile ad nightmare.

Also should the thread title mention that only 14% of PPP application respondents provided info on race?

The sample size (14%) was large enough statistically.

A majority of modern studies about race rely on sampling.

> In the meanwhile, Wardle said, “if you care about your security and privacy, perhaps stop using Zoom.

I feel like that's really easy to say if you're not an enterprise/big tech employee who has to use the product to maintain their employment during the quarantine.

Are there any privacy solutions out there for those of us who are required to use Zoom anyway?

I'm not sure if a VM is an option given the need for a camera. If it is, I think that's a pretty good option.

By default I would recommend a dedicated laptop for Zoom. Don't use it for anything else. Also shut the laptop down completely when it's not in use.

This means there won't be anything to snoop on, and the hardware will be turned off when you aren't using it.

You can pass a USB device (including a camera) to a VM. Then you can make sure that Zoom always has focus within the VM to protect yourself from the attention tracking functionality.